AMD Catalyst: Ubuntu 12.10 vs. Windows 7

[D0pamine]

Sorry, it's very annoying to read such posts .. Even Linus prefers distros who offer some "easiness". And personally, having used driconf, it didn't seem to offer much, oh well, might just be me.
Personally it's not like I don't know where the config files are, how they work or even how to recover from some disaster, I'd just rather not mess with all that. WHEN the terminal is more convenient, I use that, WHEN a gui is, I use that. If you want to talk about freedom, let the users be free to choose their way of doing things, or shut it.
If you think you shouldn't use a gui, might as well use gentoo, or better BSD.



Again, this black and white view .. Like someone saying if you're not a communist you're a nazi. If you're not a saint you're a killer. You'd agree I guess?
I bet your system is not "100% percent free", or will you tell me you have no proprietary driver, firmware etc among other things running? It might be for something on the motherboard, or for ethernet/wifi. Or even firmware for radeon to run. Might as well use windows, you're not with the FOSS people by that logic ..

So PLEASE, just accept your fellow Linux users and the choices they make.
Freedom --> Choices
If you want to talk about freedom respect other's choices.
Either provide help, or don't talk. At least regarding such things. And yes, for many people using the "free" drivers means giving up MUCH of the functionality of their hardware. Is that freedom? Or is it freedom to severely limit your hardware choices.
I'm not telling anyone to like the blobs or use them, Neither to not use the free drivers. Use what you like and works for you. And don't bash or mock in any way the others who made a different choice. That goes for both blob and free driver users though.(although let's face it, the latter kinda do it a "bit" more .. )
Is there's ANY choice that is 100% in the end? No .. Does that mean you should use Windows? Actually it means you should rip some of your hardware out of the pc by that logic, since it's not open .. :P
Sorry, the second post I quoted .. That's BS ..

Btw, should I say again that "free" driver development often relies more or less on the blobs?

so by your logic freedom lovers should accept people that choose to be in jail?

i do use gentoo but i wouldnt use BSD because the GPL is a much better licence

and why would you use a free(dom) operating system with a non-free component - this is just fucking stupid

you sir are a bell end and you should do some research

start by watching this http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...85592627775409 ( sorry its not in cartoon format and uses big words )and stop pretending that you're the leading authority on free software

and yes all my systems use 100% free software ( to the best of my knowlege! )

[Rigaldo]

driconf is a gui for .. you know what i'm not even going to bother if you need a gui to do things then you shouldn't be using gnu/linux

Sorry, it's very annoying to read such posts .. Even Linus prefers distros who offer some "easiness". And personally, having used driconf, it didn't seem to offer much, oh well, might just be me.
Personally it's not like I don't know where the config files are, how they work or even how to recover from some disaster, I'd just rather not mess with all that. WHEN the terminal is more convenient, I use that, WHEN a gui is, I use that. If you want to talk about freedom, let the users be free to choose their way of doing things, or shut it.
If you think you shouldn't use a gui, might as well use gentoo, or better BSD.

fuck the blobs though - if you're happy to use a closed blob then you may aswell use windows where games are plentiful

Again, this black and white view .. Like someone saying if you're not a communist you're a nazi. If you're not a saint you're a killer. You'd agree I guess?
I bet your system is not "100% percent free", or will you tell me you have no proprietary driver, firmware etc among other things running? It might be for something on the motherboard, or for ethernet/wifi. Or even firmware for radeon to run. Might as well use windows, you're not with the FOSS people by that logic ..

So PLEASE, just accept your fellow Linux users and the choices they make.
Freedom --> Choices
If you want to talk about freedom respect other's choices.
Either provide help, or don't talk. At least regarding such things. And yes, for many people using the "free" drivers means giving up MUCH of the functionality of their hardware. Is that freedom? Or is it freedom to severely limit your hardware choices.
I'm not telling anyone to like the blobs or use them, Neither to not use the free drivers. Use what you like and works for you. And don't bash or mock in any way the others who made a different choice. That goes for both blob and free driver users though.(although let's face it, the latter kinda do it a "bit" more .. )
Is there's ANY choice that is 100% in the end? No .. Does that mean you should use Windows? Actually it means you should rip some of your hardware out of the pc by that logic, since it's not open .. :P
Sorry, the second post I quoted .. That's BS ..

Btw, should I say again that "free" driver development often relies more or less on the blobs?

[ChrisXY]

I have to add, that I own a Notebook with that HD 4000 and it works ok (XRender for KWin). However, KWin with OpenGL is absolutely not usable (Kubuntu 12.04 with Kernel 3.4).

Btw. this news is about gaming performance, isn't it?

I like how the "just get intel" faction simply ignores intel's problems.

kwin (4.9.2) opengl compositing is - for me too - pretty much broken with latest xorg/libdrm/mesa/xf86-video-intel git on my i7 3632qm. The radeon driver just worked.

But this thread is about catalyst.
And the currently newest catalyst 12.9 Beta doesn't work with AMD Enduro.
What good is performance if I can't use it at all?

[D0pamine]

repeat after me:

linux is not for games.

linux is for pros.


if you want to play your little gay ass games fuck off to windows.

do what I did: get a laptop with intel graphics = not giving a shit about amd nightmarish linux support.

haha yeh... can i still play foobillard and wz2100 though?

i dont know though.. the radeon driver with mesa 9 performs very well - really i was shocked at how well

fuck the blobs though - if you're happy to use a closed blob then you may aswell use windows where games are plentiful

[D0pamine]

Open-source video drivers are even less good, so please keep the binary blobs alive as long as they are better. (personally I really need the binary blobs for gaming/Blendering, there is nothing at the moment that could replace it.)

with binary blobs of NVIDIA:
what I like:
- gaming just works
- desktop feels smooth
- I get a control panel for my graphics card
- Blender works faster on Linux than on Windows
- 3D performance seems to be equally to Windows
- etc.

what I don't like:
- plymouth looks weird
- some weird bugs

The open-source drivers:
what I don't like:
- games don't "just run" (missing OGL plugins/slow)
- desktop doesn't feel smooth
- No GUI control panel for my graphics card
- Blender doesn't work AT ALL with Cycles renderer (CUDA)
- 3D performance is just lower than on Windows
- a LOT of bugs/crashes in software

What I like:
- plymouth looks good

So why would you wish the binary blobs dead when there is nothing to replace it AT THE MOMENT?
Just using the graphics card with binary blobs makes a reasenable user experience.
Using the same hardware with Open-source drivers (nouveau) makes a BAD user experience.

PS> Ok, Optimus doesn't work with the binary drivers. Neither does it OOTB with the opensource drivers. That's why I don't buy hardware with optimus UNTIL it is properly supported by the binary drivers.

PPS> Opinions are opinions, facts are facts.

driconf is a gui for .. you know what i'm not even going to bother if you need a gui to do things then you shouldn't be using gnu/linux

[sonnet]

Catalyst is improving, but still not there to compete with Nvidia. (It still vastly outperforms the "open source" drivers)

Phoronix reviews are starting to look completely unreliable to me.

In this review (7950 vs gtx 680)

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=linux_hd7950_gtx680&num=5

The 7950 , which is far inferior in Windows to the gtx 680, was performing equally to the gtx 680 on linux.
This suggested that fglrx were faster than nvidia drivers on linux.

Now we get 2 reviews, comparing AMD and Nvidia drivers on linux and Windows, and it appears (and quite noticeably ) the opposite: that Nvidia drivers are better.

[V10lator]

some pro gamers also use very slow resolutions like 800x600...

real pro gamers in fact don't play for "graphic"

Exactly what I wanted to tell: Lower resolution counts to lower settings and of course a lower resolution makes the game more smooth (less chances of lag cause of GPU stalls and so on).

Sorry if this wasn't clear from the beginning, english isn't my native language.

[necro-lover]

Not true. A pro-gamer tries to get the game as smooth as possible, higher settings reduce the smoothness. Sometimes they see even more (visibly) by turning off extras (shadows, for example).

some pro gamers also use very slow resolutions like 800x600...

real pro gamers in fact don't play for "graphic"

[V10lator]

Rubbish. Take a good look at the settings most real gamers use on Windows. Almost always at 1600 x 900 or native 1080. With ULTRA settings to boot, and all extra features like 16x MSAA and DX11 extras turned ON. And by recently i mean 'within the past 8 months' recent.

Not true. A pro-gamer tries to get the game as smooth as possible, higher settings reduce the smoothness. Sometimes they see even more (visibly) by turning off extras (shadows, for example).
[quote]Under these settings in Windows a good card can easily fetch above 70--80fps if vsync is disabled on a recently-released, high graphics requirement game. Which is a far cry from what the open Radeon driver can ever hope to achieve.
Define "good card" and "recently-released, high graphics requirement game" or all you told is useless.

And openGL looks TERRIBLE when compared to DX 11. Of course you don't experience lower framerates with shittier graphics quality.

I must be blind. Please tell me where exactly you see that terrible differences:

vs.

[smitty3268]

I only see gtx 680, the most common gfx card on earth.

Err, what?

High end cards like that are never anywhere close to as common as the low-end, cheap cards.

Not even among gamers...

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/videocard/

Has it listed as #43.