Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 25

Thread: First Look: AMD Trinity APU, Linux Already Runs Well

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,351

    Default First Look: AMD Trinity APU, Linux Already Runs Well

    Phoronix: First Look: AMD Trinity APU, Linux Already Runs Well

    Remember those AMD Bulldozer benchmarks we showed back in March from an early engineering sample that was published to OpenBenchmarking.org by one of AMD's partners months prior to the product launch? Well, since the consumer-grade Bulldozer chips are going to be out soon, AMD's partners are already supplying information on the AMD Trinity APUs that won't be launched until next year. The Linux performance appears quite competitive and there's also some new codenames and details to share.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=16497

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    944

    Default

    Trinity Devastator?? Holy Terminator 2:Judgement Day Batman!!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    222

    Default

    Where's the actual numbers? Have they been pulled?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,353

    Default

    Yeah, the numbers have been pulled and I cant find them on google cache either. I wonder if there is another type of cache out there were the numbers might still be available? Anybody know?

  5. #5

    Default Fairytales

    By the time Trinity is officially out, Ubuntu 12.04 LTS should be here and hopefully with mature support and perhaps some performance optimizations within the GCC compiler.
    Lol, maybe you should look in the AMD/ATI forums section here. There's not even mature support for current and last generation AMD graphics on Linux. There's absolutely no reason to expect mature support for next gen AMD graphics on Linux.

    I recommend staying away from AMD graphics for at least another 5 years, maybe then the open drivers are mature enough. As for the proprietary drivers, they are a hopeless peace of junk reminiscent of the Windows 95 era, they will never be mature. It's impossible.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,036

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AnonymousCoward View Post
    Lol, maybe you should look in the AMD/ATI forums section here. There's not even mature support for current and last generation AMD graphics on Linux. There's absolutely no reason to expect mature support for next gen AMD graphics on Linux.

    I recommend staying away from AMD graphics for at least another 5 years, maybe then the open drivers are mature enough. As for the proprietary drivers, they are a hopeless peace of junk reminiscent of the Windows 95 era, they will never be mature. It's impossible.
    He was referring to CPU support - hence the reference to GCC optimizations, which have nothing to do with graphics.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,353

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AnonymousCoward View Post
    Lol, maybe you should look in the AMD/ATI forums section here. There's not even mature support for current and last generation AMD graphics on Linux. There's absolutely no reason to expect mature support for next gen AMD graphics on Linux.

    I recommend staying away from AMD graphics for at least another 5 years, maybe then the open drivers are mature enough. As for the proprietary drivers, they are a hopeless peace of junk reminiscent of the Windows 95 era, they will never be mature. It's impossible.
    I have 4850 and the oss drivers are working pretty darn good. I also have a 6870 which is still buggy, but are coming along real fast.

    You really should take the opportunity to try them out again before making statements like that. Otherwise if it isnt FUD, it damn sure looks like it.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,926

    Default

    For some people, "mature support" means playing freshly released games on WINE, faster than they run on Windows.

    In terms of stability and 2d performance, the AMD Mesa drivers are far better than any binary driver I've used, Nvidia's or ATI's. That's exactly what I expect my drivers to do -- give me a stable environment and stay out of my way (e.g. easy upgrading, system integration, etc.)

    That said, I am eagerly awaiting OpenGL 3 compliance, better powersaving and better performance.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    143

    Default

    Interesting situation. With AMD stock near an all-time low after the mini-crash Monday, people can stand to make boat loads of money from the stock if Bulldozer/Trinity end up being huge wins for AMD. I know any solid information on bulldozer performance is virtually impossible to find, even though the numbers will be hitting the web around Noon EST Wednesday.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,353

    Default

    Well, I'm not really expecting much. After all each int pipe is only 2 issues wide, and both int pipes in the module have to share the same frontend, which will be a bottleneck. Not to mention that most benches are going to be run on windows 7 which has a known bug that doesnt work well with BD. In addition for some god forsaken reason the big sites seem to prefer single threaded cookie cutter benchmarks.

    All in all it looks like the cards are stacked against the cpu.

    EDIT: thats why I wanted to see these numbers to see if they are anything like the windows numbers that I've seen. Averaged out it seems that BD is about 36% slower clock for clock than a Phenom II 980 on Windows 7... I was just wondering if the same was true for Linux. Also I havent seen anything about numbers for Windows 8 either, which MS claims the scheduler bug will be fixed in.
    Last edited by duby229; 10-08-2011 at 06:08 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •