Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMD Radeon HD 5750/5770

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by mirv View Post
    Yes, I don't use compiz, but compiz itself is still under a substantial bit of development unless I'm mistaken.
    Compiz is absolutely rock solid on nVidia. It's not uncommon for me to have weeks of uptime between shutdowns.

    Originally posted by mirv View Post
    You are apparently rather serious about stability - just suggesting that if that's a primary concern, also consider things without compiz (regardless of graphics hardware vendor).
    Compiz doesn't introduce any elements of instability for me with nVidia. Compiz offers some productivity enhancements as well as some extra "niceness" that I'm not willing to forgo without a pretty compelling reason.

    Ask a Windows 7 user with an nVidia card to go back to XP so they can run an ATI card and you've got a tough sell. It's a similar argument with respect to Compiz and ATI/nVidia. If there was no hardware platform that ran Compiz in a stable fashion then you've got a good argument. At the moment thought there are hardware choices that run it well. If ATI is now in that list of choices then I'm happy.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by mugginz View Post
      Compiz is absolutely rock solid on nVidia. It's not uncommon for me to have weeks of uptime between shutdowns.



      Compiz doesn't introduce any elements of instability for me with nVidia. Compiz offers some productivity enhancements as well as some extra "niceness" that I'm not willing to forgo without a pretty compelling reason.

      Ask a Windows 7 user with an nVidia card to go back to XP so they can run an ATI card and you've got a tough sell. It's a similar argument with respect to Compiz and ATI/nVidia. If there was no hardware platform that ran Compiz in a stable fashion then you've got a good argument. At the moment thought there are hardware choices that run it well. If ATI is now in that list of choices then I'm happy.
      Rock solid would be no downtime in my books. All that aside, I'm curious - what productivity enhancements does it give?
      And to put things straight: all this applies to you and you only. If nvidia is fine for you, that's great, but nvidia's drivers have their share of problems too. Head on over to nvnews to read up on some of them.
      What, btw, do windows 7 users have to do with linux here?

      Comment


      • Originally posted by mirv View Post
        Rock solid would be no downtime in my books.
        Exactly. I only shut down or restart my system when I want to. Not because I ever need to because of instability. Through the week the system is usually just left on. Depending on likely useage patters I'll either leave the machine on, or switch off. Restarts are because of kernel updates and such. Not due to brakeage.


        Originally posted by mirv View Post
        All that aside, I'm curious - what productivity enhancements does it give?
        Expose function, desktop wall, window preview in taskbar, more efficiency due to apps not being required to refresh content because a window is moved in front of it.

        Remember, we could all likely get done what we need to even if we were to be forced to use Windows 98. More modern software is nicer and all, but not always compulsory. To argue against progress because you want to support a hardware company isn't very sensible to me.

        Originally posted by mirv View Post
        And to put things straight: all this applies to you and you only. If nvidia is fine for you, that's great, but nvidia's drivers have their share of problems too. Head on over to nvnews to read up on some of them.
        Oh, I'm very aware of that. You'll find them not to be the norm though. From TNT2, MX400, 6600GT, 7600GT, 9600 and 9800GT cards on my own hardware, sometimes used in combination with T.V.s, Multiple screens, multiplecards, etc. On others' machines with 7950GT, GTX260, on-board 6250. I've not had the kind of issues people have brought up about ATI cards.

        XOrg is still quite broken in some ways compared to what is provided by other platforms. nVidia or ATI cant be held responsible for that. Where a problem is a platform intrinsic one but looks like a graphics vendor one, people are going to go bitching to the graphics vendor. nVidia aren't perfect of course. I am after the BEST, MOST OPTIMAL solution available to me however and I can only select hardware from the choices that are available to me. Which vendors product is the least worst, or the best in other words is what I'm after.


        Originally posted by mirv View Post
        What, btw, do windows 7 users have to do with linux here?
        Ask a user thats been using Windows 7 for 6 months to then go back to XP. See what they say about display performance. And about "flickeryness", etc. A non-composited desktop when compared to a hardware composited desktop has some visual nastiness that in itself is unpleasant let alone whatever enhanced window management functionality is also on the table.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by mirv View Post
          Rock solid would be no downtime in my books. All that aside, I'm curious - what productivity enhancements does it give?
          And to put things straight: all this applies to you and you only. If nvidia is fine for you, that's great, but nvidia's drivers have their share of problems too. Head on over to nvnews to read up on some of them.
          What, btw, do windows 7 users have to do with linux here?
          Some Linux users dual boot. It's true!

          I keep reading that Compiz is poor with ATI. For all the ATI fans on this board, it sure has multiple problems and they are quite detailed.

          With Nvidia, I don't know of anything specific. It's just a pain to install the drivers especially if you want to use the most recent or beta drivers. So what, though, been there, done that.

          I WANT to get an ATI card. The recent ones like the Radeon 5770 fulfills my hardware preferences, low heat, low temps, decent performance, but it sounds like there's a handful of issues and problems in Linux. The driver developers are constantly behind on support and I don't know if I want to deal with that...

          Comment


          • I'm not sure how ofter this gets mentioned, but Compiz is much, much more than just a spinning cube on the desktop. That in itself would be fairly pass?.

            A vote on those that would support the end of the Compiz and kwin compositor projects, and have them expunged from the current suite of distros, never to rear their heads again would be an interesting one indeed.

            Where people have compositing with no reliability cost I venture to say that they'd be almost unanimous in their support of compositing.

            Those who must, due to driver limitations disable Compiz, may vote in a different way however.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by mugginz View Post
              You'll find them not to be the norm though. From TNT2, MX400, 6600GT, 7600GT, 9600 and 9800GT cards on my own hardware, sometimes used in combination with T.V.s, Multiple screens, multiplecards, etc. On others' machines with 7950GT, GTX260, on-board 6250. I've not had the kind of issues people have brought up about ATI cards.

              XOrg is still quite broken in some ways compared to what is provided by other platforms. nVidia or ATI cant be held responsible for that. Where a problem is a platform intrinsic one but looks like a graphics vendor one, people are going to go bitching to the graphics vendor. nVidia aren't perfect of course. I am after the BEST, MOST OPTIMAL solution available to me however and I can only select hardware from the choices that are available to me. Which vendors product is the least worst, or the best in other words is what I'm after.

              Ask a user thats been using Windows 7 for 6 months to then go back to XP. See what they say about display performance. And about "flickeryness", etc. A non-composited desktop when compared to a hardware composited desktop has some visual nastiness that in itself is unpleasant let alone whatever enhanced window management functionality is also on the table.
              I currently have a Geforce 7950 GT. It's getting kinda old but I installed the latest Nvidia driver...smth like 195.-? Works fine. Just read the Ubuntu forums. HD Radeon HD 5xxx cards cannot be used properly using fglrx driver as Catalyst 10.2 causes problems when combined with X-Server 1.7. They complain of trying to use 2 monitors but they can't. What's the problem? At least, with Nvidia, things are consistent. Recent generations of cards will work with the same driver. Problems/issues will be limited to certain areas and Nvidia document the bugs and report fixes on the driver site (afaik). I want to support ATI, I made it clear I want to buy an ATI card and probably the HD Radeon 5770 for what it offers for the price. But, I am tempted to consider a Nvidia card because it's a safe choice. But, let's face it, they are overpriced in many cases and the leftover cards in my budget with good performance are EOL cards and they are still expensive new. I don't know which to pick yet so I'm still waiting.

              I agree with your points, btw, which was the reason for my followup, btw. Just wanted to add a few more comments for food for thought.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Panix View Post
                HD Radeon HD 5xxx cards cannot be used properly using fglrx driver as Catalyst 10.2 causes problems when combined with X-Server 1.7.
                None of the distros we support use X-Server 1.7, do they ? Would it be more correct to say that your complaint is "we don't officially support all distros with fglrx (some are open source driver only right now), and on some of those unsupported distros there is a problem with X-Server 1.7" ?

                Originally posted by Panix View Post
                They complain of trying to use 2 monitors but they can't. What's the problem?
                Most of the problems I have seen with 2 monitor systems come from not running "aticonfig --initial=dual-head" during installation.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Panix View Post
                  I agree with your points, btw, which was the reason for my followup, btw. Just wanted to add a few more comments for food for thought.
                  Thanks. I'm also in your position. Wanting to buy ATI, but weary of sub-standard drivers.

                  As I sit here and type this I have three 24" Acer screens on my desk. Only two are lit. The card I borrowed for the third screen had to go back to where it came from. I have another 24" Acer of the same model sitting in another room. I want to run all four, three would do though. In order make this so I need to buy a card. Eyefinity is the obvious choice as a solution. From a hardware point of view there is no question.

                  Unfortunately nVidia's solution going forward is to still require more than one card for more than two screens. Very sub-optimal in my opinion. ATI is absolutely the superior hardware choice for my use case.

                  Now here's the kicker. Without proper drivers, the house of cards comes a fallin' down. If ATI can be forth coming with drivers of the same functionality as nVidia then it's an easy decision for me.

                  Because others have bought ATI cards only to watch them age without full usage is an outcome I myself am not prepared to endure. The hardware purchase is predicated on the software support. It must be fully functional WHEN I by the card, not after.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by mugginz View Post
                    Exactly. I only shut down or restart my system when I want to. Not because I ever need to because of instability. Through the week the system is usually just left on. Depending on likely useage patters I'll either leave the machine on, or switch off. Restarts are because of kernel updates and such. Not due to brakeage.




                    Expose function, desktop wall, window preview in taskbar, more efficiency due to apps not being required to refresh content because a window is moved in front of it.

                    Remember, we could all likely get done what we need to even if we were to be forced to use Windows 98. More modern software is nicer and all, but not always compulsory. To argue against progress because you want to support a hardware company isn't very sensible to me.
                    I actually find most of those features nice for eye-candy, but inhibit productivity, but then that's me. I try newer things, but always go back to enlightenment (progress doesn't mean it's always better). Give E17 a go, you might like it.

                    Oh, I'm very aware of that. You'll find them not to be the norm though. From TNT2, MX400, 6600GT, 7600GT, 9600 and 9800GT cards on my own hardware, sometimes used in combination with T.V.s, Multiple screens, multiplecards, etc. On others' machines with 7950GT, GTX260, on-board 6250. I've not had the kind of issues people have brought up about ATI cards.

                    XOrg is still quite broken in some ways compared to what is provided by other platforms. nVidia or ATI cant be held responsible for that. Where a problem is a platform intrinsic one but looks like a graphics vendor one, people are going to go bitching to the graphics vendor. nVidia aren't perfect of course. I am after the BEST, MOST OPTIMAL solution available to me however and I can only select hardware from the choices that are available to me. Which vendors product is the least worst, or the best in other words is what I'm after.
                    Indeed, I very rarely have issues with ATI cards that others seem to have. Conversely I always had problems (stability, xorg crashes mainly) with nvidia. Which is why yes, do what's best for you - same as everyone should do.


                    Ask a user thats been using Windows 7 for 6 months to then go back to XP. See what they say about display performance. And about "flickeryness", etc. A non-composited desktop when compared to a hardware composited desktop has some visual nastiness that in itself is unpleasant let alone whatever enhanced window management functionality is also on the table.
                    Actually, having gone on about enlightenment, a better comparison would be e16 vs e17 (bearing in mind that e17 is still in heavy development).

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by mirv View Post
                      I actually find most of those features nice for eye-candy, but inhibit productivity, but then that's me. I try newer things, but always go back to enlightenment (progress doesn't mean it's always better). Give E17 a go, you might like it.
                      At first glance it would seem that e17 might not be what I'm after in an environment. The second test box should be back tomorrow so will throw it on that. I prefer a bare metal install for things where an initial impression is important. What distro would you suggest for said install?

                      Originally posted by mirv View Post
                      Indeed, I very rarely have issues with ATI cards that others seem to have. Conversely I always had problems (stability, xorg crashes mainly) with nvidia. Which is why yes, do what's best for you - same as everyone should do.
                      ATI stable where nVidia isn't? Not a very common outcome there.



                      Originally posted by mirv View Post
                      Actually, having gone on about enlightenment, a better comparison would be e16 vs e17 (bearing in mind that e17 is still in heavy development).
                      They both seem to use tiling window managers though. Most of the best examples of e17 I've seen on-line have been supported by Compiz. Will have to get a feel for myself though. Should be interesting.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X