Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 54

Thread: GeForce 700 vs. Radeon Rx 200 Series With The Latest Linux Drivers

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    805

    Default

    http://www.phoronix.com/forums/showt...esktop-Effects

    Looks like known and common problem .

    The resize effect has by now been significantly improved to provide a fast texture scaling. This provides a fast and useful workaround for the slow resizing with fglrx. Sorry that we cannot do something real about it, but fglrx is out of our control. From personal experience the resizing is better with radeon and even worse with NVIDIA blob, but significantly better on nouveau.


    https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=208770

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    297

    Default

    I notice no difference between radeonsi and fglrx 2D acceleration while using cinnamon. Probably a bug in your DE.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,117

    Default

    I think the R7 260X does surprisingly good, especially against the 750 Ti (Maxwell). Just ordered the ASUS 260X OC 2GB. Fast enough for me, and it's based on the newest GCN 1.1-architecture.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    103

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by phill1978 View Post
    Valve have chosen Nvidia and rightly so.
    Valve didn't do what was right, they took the pragmatic approach. NVIDIA doesn't even have open source drivers. They're a vendor that should be avoided at all costs.

  5. #15

    Default Beg To Differ

    Quote Originally Posted by brad0 View Post
    Valve didn't do what was right, they took the pragmatic approach. NVIDIA doesn't even have open source drivers. They're a vendor that should be avoided at all costs.
    I avoid AMD at all costs, never forgiven them for dropping HD4000 or less support so soon after selling laptops with those chips in. At least with Nvidia you get very long support cycles for their binary blob which does usually work very well.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,386

    Default

    So...

    1. Everyone says we should kill Catalyst and focus on open source drivers

    2. We hire developers and help make good open source drivers

    3. We phase out Catalyst support for the older GPUs but keep improving the open source driver support for them

    4. ... and you'll never forgive us for doing it

    I don't think I understand.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    707

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mmstick View Post
    I would imagine that Arch dropped support for it since there is no need for Catalyst anymore if you are already running the latest stable open source driver stack.
    Arch dropped them, because they are a pain in the ass to maintain when you're a distribution with bleeding edge packages and Catalyst often doesn't support the latest X.Org ABI or at least didn't in the past.

    Quote Originally Posted by brad0 View Post
    Valve didn't do what was right, they took the pragmatic approach. NVIDIA doesn't even have open source drivers. They're a vendor that should be avoided at all costs.
    Yeah good luck running Unreal Engine 4 and CryEngine on the open source drivers. Without NVIDIA gaming on Linux wouldn't be anywhere, lol. It's the only vendor where you aren't punished with bad performance for running Linux.
    Last edited by blackout23; 04-26-2014 at 06:48 AM.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    297

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bridgman View Post
    So...

    1. Everyone says we should kill Catalyst and focus on open source drivers

    2. We hire developers and help make good open source drivers

    3. We phase out Catalyst support for the older GPUs but keep improving the open source driver support for them

    4. ... and you'll never forgive us for doing it

    I don't think I understand.
    Most of the complaints are that catalyst is extremely unstable/unsupported by many distros while the FOSS driver for the HD-7000/R7/R9 isn't very performant which leaves people with those cards in a pretty bad situation.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,386

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by peppercats View Post
    Most of the complaints are that catalyst is extremely unstable/unsupported by many distros while the FOSS driver for the HD-7000/R7/R9 isn't very performant which leaves people with those cards in a pretty bad situation.
    Open source performance for the newer cards is continuing to improve pretty quickly, but Slartibart... hold on... Slartifartblast's complaint was about older (in this case mobile HD4xxx parts, so RV710/730 ?) where the open source drivers are already quite mature.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    87

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bridgman View Post
    Open source performance for the newer cards is continuing to improve pretty quickly, but Slartibart... hold on... Slartifartblast's complaint was about older (in this case mobile HD4xxx parts, so RV710/730 ?) where the open source drivers are already quite mature.
    Is there any plan to give fglrx a better 2d performance so we can use composite desktops without performance loss? Again, I give the example of window resizing in ubuntu 14.04 with Unity DE.

Posting Permissions

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