Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12

Thread: AMD Radeon R9 290: Still Not Good For Linux Users

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,770

    Default AMD Radeon R9 290: Still Not Good For Linux Users

    Phoronix: AMD Radeon R9 290: Still Not Good For Linux Users

    When reviewing the AMD Radeon R9 290 under Linux back in November we found the Catalyst Linux performance to be quite poor for this high-end "Hawaii" graphics processor compared to the pleasurable performance reports under Windows and a strong showing against NVIDIA's wares. Even with succeeding updates we still found the R9 290 Linux performance to be poor -- and that's for the high-performance Catalyst driver over the open-source RadeonSI Gallium3D-based driver. In this article are fresh benchmarks of the high-end NVIDIA GeForce and AMD Radeon graphics cards from Ubuntu Linux using the latest beta graphics drivers.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=19872

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    18

    Question maybe passthrough helps the adoption!

    Quote Originally Posted by phoronix View Post
    Phoronix: AMD Radeon R9 290: Still Not Good For Linux Users

    When reviewing the AMD Radeon R9 290 under Linux back in November we found the Catalyst Linux performance to be quite poor for this high-end "Hawaii" graphics processor compared to the pleasurable performance reports under Windows and a strong showing against NVIDIA's wares. Even with succeeding updates we still found the R9 290 Linux performance to be poor -- and that's for the high-performance Catalyst driver over the open-source RadeonSI Gallium3D-based driver. In this article are fresh benchmarks of the high-end NVIDIA GeForce and AMD Radeon graphics cards from Ubuntu Linux using the latest beta graphics drivers.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=19872
    I want to buy one very fast GPU (capable of 1440p in VM, I mean with 5% kinda overhead) to passthrough it to KVM from gentoo. This way I will have gaming and not caring about drivers. I wonder if their driver at least catching up to nvidia's. Last time (2XXX radeon series) I checked theirs even was sucking in windows.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    255

    Default

    performance govenor?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jakubo View Post
    performance govenor?
    What about it? It wont work in VM?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    164

    Default

    Heard that AMD will be much faster in 3.13 or 3.14? Seems they found some bug in the kernel.

    Interesting would also be to see 3D performance differences using different WM, Gnome, Unity etc. in upcoming 14.04.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    7

    Default fcat

    Have you heard of nvidia's fcat - Frame Capture Analysis Tool? Do you know if it works on linux?

  7. #7

    Default

    But how does the card fare with radeonsi?

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    255

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mmrezaie View Post
    What about it? It wont work in VM?
    I was referring to the article. Since Michael was using the 3.12 Kernel the faster GPUsd wouldnt run at full load under certain conditions. Thats why its needed to switch on performance govenor, or have at least 3.13 kernel. And i wonder if that happened here in this article. There are a couple of articles referring to that issue.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    402

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FutureSuture View Post
    But how does the card fare with radeonsi?
    I was interested in that as well. I'm actually thinking about wasting money on this card, instead of buying a 7xxx series card for the same amount of money. But I think the RadeonSI hasn't implemented basic support for 290 yet, so we're still left in the dark on that one. If you search phoronix regarding the subject, you can find lots of articles mentioning it. I haven't done that though, so I might be wrong about my previous statement

    Michael: Could we get the same tests done on Windows as well? Perhaps not as many cards, half of them will do. Just to see how good the 290 is "supposed" to be for the tests you ran.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    MA, USA
    Posts
    1,300

    Default

    Michael:
    Based on what I see in the images, it seems as though you only test 1 GPU at a time, meaning, you open up a computer, take out an old GPU, insert a different one, boot up, run tests, and repeat. To make life easier for you, you should try cramming as many GPUs in 1 system as you can at a time. Before anyone freaks saying this is a bad idea, hear me out: Put all high-end GPUs in 16x slots that are documented to run at the full 16x bandwidth. Then, put all mid-range GPUs in slots that operate at 8x bandwidth, and put all low-end GPUs in slots at 4x bandwidth. This will allow at LEAST 4 GPUs to be inserted into a single system at a time, and there are plenty of options to switch between GPUs. I am NOT saying to test all 4 at the same time - that's a terrible idea.

    Just so everyone is clear though, not even high-end GPUs use the full bandwidth of PCIe 2.0 @ 16x. At worst, there might be a 1FPS drop by putting mid range GPUs into an 8x slot. If Michael reads this, he could really save himself a lot of time. Besides, he might be able to do SLi/Crossfire tests this way - I'm not sure he knows this but I'm pretty sure he's able to crossfire some of the parts he currently owns.

Posting Permissions

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