Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How Old ATI GPUs Can Be Faster On Open Drivers

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

  • #81
    Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
    Im NOT amd customer if I buy and use their card. You follow?
    Do yourself a favor and read here.
    You might want to study the Law of the Excluded Middle:



    In practice, it means that you cannot buy a company's product without being a customer of that company.

    Anyway, I think that you would do everyone a favor if you posted your ideas and opinions to a blog rather than an internet forum. It would ensure that your thoughts are not lost in an internet forum thread that no one will read after a few weeks. It would also mean that our mundane posts would not serve to obscure your grandiose thoughts from public view. Posting them on an internet forum guarantees that next to no one will read them in a few weeks while posting them on a blog will enable people to read them for years to come.

    Comment


    • #82
      Another crazycheese trollfest

      Seems like he starts one of these up about once a week.

      1. You're money is going towards the oss driver, they have 2 full time employees working on it. I assume your real argument is that not ENOUGH money is going towards it.

      2. If you want performance, money going towards a cross-platform driver, up-to-date support with the latest hardware, that's exactly what fglrx is for. It may suck, but it's basically exactly what you seem to be asking for and complaining that AMD isn't doing.

      3. You keep complaining about having to buy 6 year old cards to work with the radeon drivers. Huh? They're only about 3 months behind new hardware right now, and catching up fast. 69xx parts are the only ones not supported right now. The new cards are all really slow, but that will be the next thing that gets tackled after hardware support finally catches up this summer.

      4. If you really want money to go to the OSS devs, then you should send it to them. Directly. Stop complaining that companies aren't doing that for you, and do it yourself.

      Comment


      • #83
        Originally posted by smitty3268 View Post
        *Garbage*
        Unlike you, troll, I was searching for the way to improve xf86-video-ati to the extent it is a usable driver and nothing else:
        - works without resorting to xorg.conf/xorg.conf.d? check
        - any gfx utility to set options? check
        - any opengl3? check
        - any GLSL/VBO support? check
        - any 3D speed optimization compared to windows driver? check
        - any speed optimization in composite desktop mode? check
        - any Amd stream support? check
        - any video accel support? check
        - any serious multimonitor support? check
        - works without blobs? check
        - overclocking? check
        - complete current gen within a freaking year? check
        - current gen card speed shows supposed speed? check
        - buying card, buys developer attention? check
        - any additional support mechanisms present? check
        - driver development speed match or greater than hardware development speed? check
        - company officially supports the driver? check
        - company is ready to discuss its developent? check

        I unrolled the suggested strategy two times for RFC from Bridgeman and people who care about opensource driver(are there any?) and used the thread to discuss it. Trolling? Thread hijacking? Trying to start flame war? Offending people?

        You want my experience with fglrx? Dead Xorg right on start, corrupted screens on tty, only opengl support lower than nvidia, 4 year hardware support window. *Official*

        Right now microsoft owns GTK, nearly completely owns Qt and Nokia patents, owns Novell, Redhat is stuck in corporate support, Ubuntu just exploiting Linux label without doing anything, GCC and co are replaced by solutions from proprietary vendors, scan and printing backends are joke, java shifted from tool to patent royalities toy in hands of oracle, kernel is anything but modular or forgiving on developer time, xorg is a mess, Wayland is no better than already existing WDDM. You happy with situation?

        Should I leave for windows and nvidia because YOUR linux is already usable only with blobs and even then only to very small percentage of windows?

        Oh forgive me I seek way improve your holly unsupported unprofessional always-broken lagging pile of code thrown together and labeled "GNU/Linux", I see now thanks to you it magically improves on its own. Bye!

        Comment


        • #84
          AMD driver support is broken. fglrx goes for several months after the release of a new X Server without support, and by the time fglrx gets support, a new X Server release is looming just a few months away.

          The open-source drivers are cool, but they're too slow; people don't buy graphics cards so they can wait around for two or three years while OSS devs figure out their own drivers. For integrated or laptop cards, it may be fine depending on what you want to do, but people who buy discrete GPUs want to use them so that their graphics processing is accelerated (there are a few isolated cases where you'd want them for GPGPU; hashing, for instance, is 4-5x faster on AMD than nVidia). They don't buy them so they can file bug reports all day long or wait for three years before they can play any games.

          Again, Linux support is an investment that AMD would do well to make. fglrx doesn't really count as it's rarely functional. If there isn't a kernel ABI or X Server issue, there's driver bugs that make things difficult to play, like the driver bugs that make almost everything unplayable on Wine. The OSS drivers do not have sufficient support for Wine, either. Gamers that use Linux are going to use Wine to play games, and if you want to do that, the only option is nvidia.

          While I appreciate AMD's lip service to open-source, at least make *something* that works consistently and reliably on Linux. nvidia only has a blob. If AMD had a blob that worked as well as nvidia's and had the OSS drivers where they're at today, it'd be a no-brainer to use AMD. fglrx, however, is not now and has never been in this state.

          Where is the VDPAU from AMD? Last I knew fglrx didn't even support hw accelerated video well. I've had nothing but problems and incompatibilities with it.

          Any impartial person who wants to use Linux as a serious multi-faceted multimedia workstation is going to choose nvidia. I say impartial because ideologues are not impartial; their support of AMD/ATI is based on the documentation they've dumped, not an independent analysis of the card or its potential. We've seen now that the OSS drivers for AMD cards are not going to be up to snuff without a major outside investment, so it's silly to buy AMD just because the docs have been released; even with the docs, it takes years before cards are fully supported, and even then they're usually missing 30-50% of their performance.

          This is what AMD needs to fix. nVidia has Linux support even if it's not in the format most of us like. nvidia's blob just works in the vast majority of situations and it's updated for new stable X Server and kernel releases usually before they're released. AMD gets around to updating fglrx about 3 or 4 months after these are released, by which time a new release is looming. nvidia provides real hw-accel'd video decode and first-class 3D performance, basically equivalent to performance extracted in Windows.

          When AMD does these things, even in a blob, AMD will be an option of equivalent footing with nvidia. Right now an AMD card is a serious detriment to a good Linux experience because of the crappy state of their drivers. If you AMD doesn't think they can do it alone, please hire the OSS guys, who are doing a great job with what they have to work with.

          Comment


          • #85
            Originally posted by agd5f View Post
            Since we are talking about theoretical situations, what happens when haiku becomes the dominant OS and no vendors have full featured drivers?
            Thatguy stops trolling?

            No wait, that's impossible.

            Comment


            • #86
              Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
              I unrolled the suggested strategy two times for RFC from Bridgeman and people who care about opensource driver(are there any?) and used the thread to discuss it. Trolling? Thread hijacking? Trying to start flame war? Offending people?
              In order: Yes, Yes, Yes, No.

              You want my experience with fglrx? Dead Xorg right on start, corrupted screens on tty, only opengl support lower than nvidia, 4 year hardware support window. *Official*
              What's your point?

              Right now microsoft owns GTK, nearly completely owns Qt and Nokia patents, owns Novell, Redhat is stuck in corporate support, Ubuntu just exploiting Linux label without doing anything, GCC and co are replaced by solutions from proprietary vendors, scan and printing backends are joke, java shifted from tool to patent royalities toy in hands of oracle, kernel is anything but modular or forgiving on developer time, xorg is a mess, Wayland is no better than already existing WDDM. You happy with situation?
              Huh? What does any of that have to do with what you were talking about - getting AMD to pay OSS driver developers. Do you think they should start paying GTK developers too?

              Should I leave for windows and nvidia because YOUR linux is already usable only with blobs and even then only to very small percentage of windows?
              You really should if it's better for you. Personally, I can already use the OSS drivers and they work fine for me.

              Oh forgive me I seek way improve your holly unsupported unprofessional always-broken lagging pile of code thrown together and labeled "GNU/Linux", I see now thanks to you it magically improves on its own. Bye!
              It's certainly not going to improve by anything you're doing here. That's been explained to you multiple times now.

              Comment


              • #87
                Originally posted by smitty3268 View Post
                In order: Yes, Yes, Yes, No.
                Trolling. My post was contained in the Original news by Michael. Dare to look up. I was not trolling.
                Thread hijacking. Nope, since the original thread is about crappy opensource driver and the answers I got from AMD only pointed they do not care.
                Flame war. I was responding to any single question that was directed to me.
                Offending people. This will start unless you stop trolling and posting BS. Ty.


                Originally posted by smitty3268 View Post
                What's your point?
                Catalyst driver is crap and needs way more attention (on release basis).
                Opensource driver lacks any future to be seen as performance driver at all. Even subperformance is lacking - it is straight IGP.

                Originally posted by smitty3268 View Post
                Huh? What does any of that have to do with what you were talking about - getting AMD to pay OSS driver developers. Do you think they should start paying GTK developers too?
                I think you have enough brains to figure that out yourself. If you dont - AMD and AMD driver are related and expected to be supported by people that buy AMD card for linux.


                Originally posted by smitty3268 View Post
                You really should if it's better for you. Personally, I can already use the OSS drivers and they work fine for me.
                You must be using IGP. Use framebuffer then - IGP does not need power management. And any performance card is deemed useless on opensource drivers, even AMD does not hestate to mention that.
                "Who's gonna buy 300$ card to use it with opensource driver?"
                Who?
                ME.
                Oh wait, you don't deserve it.
                You deem opensource driver to suck infinitely.
                And your proprietary driver, even patched after months of work, will match current state of nvidia.


                Originally posted by smitty3268 View Post
                It's certainly not going to improve by anything you're doing here. That's been explained to you multiple times now.
                600,000$ every year will not improve it.
                People such as me, who buy amd to support amd are ignored.
                Asshats as yourself help current situation a lot - by trolling, flagging people with initiative as idiotic, considering 2+2 developers working on IGP drivers completely acceptable.
                People as you consider windows good operating system.
                They consider linux and opensource second class student project that has some minor chance land on server.
                They think someone using opensource is a moron.
                They are perfectly acceptable if driver barely works and consider any attention from developer unnecessary.
                They love DRM, support proprietary companies and their number 1 software is bit torrent.
                I have zero interest reading your "multiple times posted" trolling garbage.
                Contrary to your, I have very strong belief that information must be free and human work must be payed. Not vice versa.

                Comment


                • #88
                  Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
                  Trolling. My post was contained in the Original news by Michael. Dare to look up. I was not trolling.
                  I don't know which of the 3 quotes Michael had in his post was yours, but clearly none of them had anything to do with the topic you are currently talking about. You are thread hijacking, just look at the article title: "How Old ATI GPUs Can Be Faster On Open Drivers". It's talking about why older radeon cards are faster than the new ones on the OSS drivers. Not about any of the things you're discussing here.

                  Offending people. This will start unless you stop trolling and posting BS. Ty.
                  LOL. I honestly don't think you can offend me, i have a pretty thick skin and most of your posts just make me laugh. Take that as a challenge if you like.

                  Catalyst driver is crap and needs way more attention (on release basis).
                  Opensource driver lacks any future to be seen as performance driver at all. Even subperformance is lacking - it is straight IGP.
                  Yeah, everyone knows that. What's your point? I can start spouting off random astronomy facts, but how does that affect the argument i'm trying to make? That's what i'm asking you about.

                  I think you have enough brains to figure that out yourself. If you dont - AMD and AMD driver are related and expected to be supported by people that buy AMD card for linux.
                  Apparently i don't. Please explain to me what any of this has to do with the topic being discussed:
                  Right now microsoft owns GTK, nearly completely owns Qt and Nokia patents, owns Novell, Redhat is stuck in corporate support, Ubuntu just exploiting Linux label without doing anything, GCC and co are replaced by solutions from proprietary vendors, scan and printing backends are joke, java shifted from tool to patent royalities toy in hands of oracle, kernel is anything but modular or forgiving on developer time, xorg is a mess, Wayland is no better than already existing WDDM. You happy with situation?
                  You must be using IGP. Use framebuffer then - IGP does not need power management. And any performance card is deemed useless on opensource drivers, even AMD does not hestate to mention that.
                  r300g gives quite good performance, which in fact was part of the original article here. r600g doesn't yet, but people are starting to look into optimizing it now. It's not done yet, and will get better. It's not going to be completely frozen at the current speed forever, is that what you're afraid of? Or are you just too impatient to wait?

                  "Who's gonna buy 300$ card to use it with opensource driver?"
                  Who?
                  ME.
                  Oh wait, you don't deserve it.
                  Wait, what? I don't deserve to buy a $300 card myself? Or for you to buy one? I'm totally confused by this comment, sorry.

                  You deem opensource driver to suck infinitely.
                  No i don't. In fact i said i was quite happy with them - you're the one who seems to think they suck, not me.

                  And your proprietary driver, even patched after months of work, will match current state of nvidia.
                  Yeah. That seems to be what you were asking for in your previous posts, what with asking AMD to support a cross-platform driver with more money, etc. I guess you should be more specific? You specifically want an open source cross-platform driver they support? What makes you think it would actually be any better than the current fglrx or radeon drivers?

                  600,000$ every year will not improve it.
                  That would actually probably be enough to make a dent.
                  People such as me, who buy amd to support amd are ignored.
                  You aren't ignored, you got a personal response (actually several) from the manager in charge of the OSS driver development at AMD. The response just wasn't what you wanted to hear.

                  Asshats as yourself help current situation a lot - by trolling, flagging people with initiative as idiotic, considering 2+2 developers working on IGP drivers completely acceptable.
                  Thanks for that. I'll be completely supportive of you when you actually come up with a good idea. Until then, i consider this badgering and beating a dead horse.

                  People as you consider windows good operating system.
                  Actually, yes, i do. At least Windows 7 and 2008.

                  They consider linux and opensource second class student project that has some minor chance land on server.
                  No, I don't. Stop trying to put words in my mouth that I've never said.

                  They think someone using opensource is a moron.
                  Again, no. As i said in the previous post, i personally use opensource drivers (under linux, of course).

                  They are perfectly acceptable if driver barely works and consider any attention from developer unnecessary.
                  Again, nope.

                  They love DRM, support proprietary companies and their number 1 software is bit torrent.
                  Getting redundent - nope.

                  I have zero interest reading your "multiple times posted" trolling garbage.
                  Contrary to your, I have very strong belief that information must be free and human work must be payed. Not vice versa.
                  Ok, so now this entire diatribe is about freedom of information? How many different directions is this rambling rant going to go off in? This is what i mean by you going off topic and giving me laughs.

                  Comment


                  • #89
                    Originally posted by Qaridarium
                    and you really believe what are you writing here?
                    Yes, I promise you I have no reason to lie about something so trivial on an internet forum.

                    Some Points of Fakt:
                    the windows7/server2008 kernel is overall 15% slower than the linux-kernel.
                    windows7/server2008 do not have an B-tree filesystem(winfs) and ntfs is 60% slower than ext4.
                    windows7/server2008 do not have an packetmanagment-system.
                    windows7/server2008 do not have an central update mechanism of the software installed or the drivers.
                    windows7/server2008 do not have an central driver database.
                    and so one and so one.
                    Sure, every OS has it's weak points. My point is i don't think any of that is a deal-breaker. Just like I don't think Linux's weak points make it a bad OS either.

                    maybe windows8 do have winFS a btree file system and maybe W8 do have an packetmanagment or in M$ talk App-store maybe windows8 do have an central driver datebase.

                    i think you only think windows7 is good because the older windows versions are more bad.
                    I really don't know anything about windows 8 so i won't comment on it.

                    Comment


                    • #90
                      Originally posted by Qaridarium
                      i aks you a simple question all my points ar no deal-breaker point but why is windows7 a good OS? what kind of points do you have for that point of view?

                      "lie" be sure i wrote "Believe" means i'm for sure you only believe and you really can not know this for sure.
                      and in "believe" there is no "LIE" because you believe it or not.
                      I've never had it crash on me. It's reliable. No worry about FS corruption. Responsive desktop. Fastest 3D graphics. No tearing. The interface is fancier than Gnome but less blingy that KDE or OSX, i find it to be a good balance. Firefox runs better on it. I don't have to worry about whether WINE will run something or not, because most things already run natively.

                      Now, there are also plenty of things i don't like about it. I'm not going to argue about whether it's the best OS out there or not, I just think it deserves to be called a good one. The days of Windows being a total embarrassment are over, at least for now.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X