Tweet
I checked the settings, and anti-tear was turned off in the Catalyst control panel and v-sync was also turned off in game. When I dropped the setting from 1920x1200 down to 1024x768 with minimum settings the FPS only went up from ~57 to ~59.5. This does look like a sync problem but I cannot find any other places to change it. Any ideas?
-
-
Do you really expect the same performance using Windows only game through wine compared to native performance? Are you kidding me?Originally posted by spaceghost View PostComment
-
I never said I expected the same performance. However, since I got very similar results between Windows and Linux with an older nVidia card I think its reasonable to believe the ATI card in Linux should do a lot better. This seems to be an issue with settings more than the driver itself, especially that some have reported reasonable Linux performance with this card.Comment
-
Sadly no - my experience with wine is somewhat limited, as I prefer to dual boot for windows-only gaming. My guess would either be an in-program setting, or a wine setting. If native programs are framerate limited too, then possibly an xorg.conf setting. I can't help much beyond that though, sorry.Originally posted by spaceghost View PostComment
-
While I wouldn't expect performance to be the same, they won't be incredibly far off for something like CS:S. If, however, a more recent eye-candy game were tried, then that's a different story.Originally posted by BenderRodriguez View PostComment
-
Do you really expect an ATi card to be usable under Linux? Are you kidding me?Originally posted by BenderRodriguez View PostComment
-
To be honest, I have no idea but that is why I am asking these questions. Some people have reported (relatively) good performance with WINE and ATI cards. Any relevant information would be appreciated.Originally posted by cruiseoveride View PostComment
-
This is quite sad since a few years back I chose to buy an ATi 4850 only because AMD had an open source strategy. I hadn't checked how lacking that support actually is, or how lacking their binary drivers are. Shame on me I guess.Originally posted by cruiseoveride View PostComment
-
A few years back, perhaps things were in a different state - the open source drivers have needed time after all. These days though, most of the bad rep comes from those years ago and not the current state.Originally posted by Azpegath View PostComment
-
Last summer Opensource Gallium drivers was unable to render even glxgears. By now, HL2 up to Episode 2 (decluding, yet) is mostly playable. OSS drivers has great 2D performance - much better than in any proprietary driver, and current 3D performance is on par with fglrx on simple tasks. Some features still doesn't supported (like occlusion test via EXT_depth_check), which prevents some games from starting (HL2: EP2, Portal, Dead Space*, Bulletstorm), but features that are implemented are working quite well, at least.
fglrx has many capabilities, but most of them are of lower-than-normal quality, so you'll never get nvidia-alike image on fglrx (while GLSL supported in theory, fglrx fails to compile some shaders, resulting in missing effects, garbaged screen of simple hangs and glitches). And this, I hate to say, seems to be ignored by fglrx team (they are working on flash acceleration, that is much more important then games
).
This way driver will be dead in a couple of years, I suppose, as OSS drivers will just outperform it.
By the way, it seems that newer Hybrid graphics systems, like NVidia Optimus, will be never supported by any proprietary driver, just because intel driver is OSS and based on mesa/gallium and proprietary drivers are incompatible with mesa, so they will never coexist.
So well all should be happy to have ATI card. It sucks by now (in Linux), but it'll rock in near future, I'm sure of it.Comment
Comment