Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMD Admits It Has Linux Problems

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

  • phoronix
    started a topic AMD Admits It Has Linux Problems

    AMD Admits It Has Linux Problems

    Phoronix: AMD Admits It Has Linux Problems

    AMD admits it has had some Linux support problems with its graphics drivers and they'll be working to improve the situation...

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

  • RussianNeuroMancer
    replied
    Originally posted by JanC View Post
    You have access to lossless video source material...?
    Maybe he watch only Sintel?
    http://media.xiph.org/sintel/sintel-4k-tiff16/

    Leave a comment:


  • JanC
    replied
    Originally posted by uid313 View Post
    People who transcode will burn in hell.
    Encoding should only be done from a lossless source, never from a lossy source.
    You have access to lossless video source material...?

    Leave a comment:


  • del_diablo
    replied
    Ideally vsync would add 1 frame delay on input. In practical cases it usually adds 4-5, and combined with all the other problems in system(for instance another 10 frames from LCD monitors input lag), its a mess.

    Originally posted by Gusar View Post
    Where you been, bro? Nvidia 302.11 beta driver has xrandr support.
    A beta is not a driver that should be trusted. Keke
    Last edited by del_diablo; 05-31-2012, 03:30 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Newfie
    replied
    Originally posted by johnc View Post
    What kind of performance problems do you experience?
    Input lag when typing (characters showing up on screen too slowly, or key presses not being instant while gaming), massive performance drop in 3d games/Flash, window drag lag, uselessly slow scrolling in all applications, etc. It fixes tearing but borks everything else.

    Leave a comment:


  • curaga
    replied
    Originally posted by mattst88 View Post
    Another aspect is when said non-developers compare vendors on things such as time between hardware release and usable drivers.
    That is a completely valid comparison, as such drivers should always be ready at launch time irrespective of the company.

    Leave a comment:


  • johnc
    replied
    AMD has been mailing it in for years now and their excuses are getting pretty lame at this point.

    NVIDIA supports FreeBSD, Linux, OS X, Solaris, Windows and embedded platforms like Android. AMD is basically Windows or GTFO.

    NVIDIA is aggressively pursuing future markets and supporting a broad variety of platforms, rather than resting on the laurels of early 2000's fanboyism. AMD still doesn't see any utility in the smartphone / tablet market.

    Want to build a low-end HTPC with AMD? Get ready to fork over $100 for a Windows license. Meanwhile NVIDIA gives us VDPAU on a $10 card.

    Want to do GPGPU computing? Good luck on a UNIX-like system. But at least AMD software engineers are giving us OpenCL-enabled WinZip and HandBrake (on Windows). There goes a top priority.

    Seriously, I've got nothing positive to say about this company any more. My early-2000s love affair is totally dead at this point.

    Leave a comment:


  • johnc
    replied
    Originally posted by Newfie View Post
    That option would be quite nice if it didn't significantly reduce overall performance.
    What kind of performance problems do you experience?

    Leave a comment:


  • Newfie
    replied
    Originally posted by squirrl View Post
    AMD Catalyst Control Center // Display Options // Tear Free // Enable Tear Free Desktop to reduce tearing.

    Gee wiz Batman, that options been there for years.
    That option would be quite nice if it didn't significantly reduce overall performance.

    Leave a comment:


  • smitty3268
    replied
    Originally posted by entropy View Post
    My question has not been a rhetorical one.
    I simply don't know it.

    Let's assume they make use of the available OpenGL cores (from the windows driver implementations for instance)
    and just wrap around platform specific code - similar to what NVidia and AMD does for their Linux blobs.
    Then why is it that they still stick with OpenGL 3.2 in Lion?
    Yes, there might be reasons for that - other than writing large parts of it on their own - but it's strange, isn't it?

    Edit: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...item&px=OTI0OA ("Mac Graphics Drivers Are Still Troubled", March 25, 2011)
    The driver situation on Macs is very similar to Windows.

    On Windows, Microsoft implements Direct3D, and the vendor drivers are expected to hook into it.

    The same is true for Apple's implementation of OpenGL on Macs.

    They implement a lot of the high-level code but leave a lot of it still to AMD and NVidia. Their OpenGL implementations on Windows and Linux have to do more to re-implement the parts that Apple does.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X