That's pretty impressive, Michael. I guess the advertising will be enough to pay the server's cost
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Avivo Linux R500 Driver v0.1.0 Coming
Collapse
X
-
Tremendous work, I was expecting the Nouveau driver before the Avivo one, but perhaps the ATI one is the most urgently needed of course ;-).
So much for bashing fglrx drivers, they are after all not that bad as much they are cursed for . Yes, it gives 50% performance of the hardware's capability, but it more or less works stable ;-). Aside, its not just Linux, ATI's performance in OSX is equally horrible . My sister has a iMac with a x1600, on which doom3 @640x480 gives about 50 fps in OSX, a little better in linux (55fps or so, and a little smoother too - it feels like fps is capped or something ;-) and 120 fps in windows xp. I wonder if iMac users with ati cards have ever bothered cribbing .
Meanwhile, XGL does work fine and stable with fglrx (no 3d of course). Even on a modest radeon 200m, its pretty good. On another note, the image quality of fglrx drivers is pretty good too . Also, I am tempted to say that perhaps X-effects are broken on almost every graphics hardware . ATI - no need to mention. Intel - AIGLX is apparently fluid smooth on a 915/945+ say, but I get pretty nagging artifacts when I play video. (Or I might need some work arounds I guess). Smoothest and perfect on Nvidia cards, but people seem to have the turbocache blacking issues after long time. Atleast I must say 'it works' in case of Nvidia.
PS : After seeing the gtkperf benchmark (never heard of it before , I installed it and was happy to see it giving 160 seconds on the geforce 7400 go in my notebook . Btw - were the tests performed in that same small default window or full screen ?
Comment
-
Aside, its not just Linux, ATI's performance in OSX is equally horrible . My sister has a iMac with a x1600, on which doom3 @640x480 gives about 50 fps in OSX, a little better in linux (55fps or so, and a little smoother too - it feels like fps is capped or something ;-)
just a random thought.
Comment
-
Originally posted by hdas View PostPS : After seeing the gtkperf benchmark (never heard of it before , I installed it and was happy to see it giving 160 seconds on the geforce 7400 go in my notebook . Btw - were the tests performed in that same small default window or full screen ?Michael Larabel
https://www.michaellarabel.com/
Comment
-
Originally posted by hdas View Post
Meanwhile, XGL does work fine and stable with fglrx (no 3d of course). Even on a modest radeon 200m, its pretty good. On another note, the image quality of fglrx drivers is pretty good
and Xgl is quite dead as codebase too iirc. Other than showing of beryl (and hoping) Xgl is no good.
There really is no point in trying to see the glass as half full, we all know it's nearly empty.
imho.
Comment
-
Originally posted by rolz View PostThere really is no point in trying to see the glass as half full, we all know it's nearly empty.Michael Larabel
https://www.michaellarabel.com/
Comment
-
And when the truck arrives, it may has overhauled the competition.
Okay that's enough. It sounds philosophic and I don't like that. What I mean is that GF8 has not the full performance on Linux at the moment, so AMD could beat nVidia. That would be funny cause people would laugh at you if you would tell them that your fglrx driver is faster then the nvidia driver.
Comment
-
What I mean is that GF8 has not the full performance on Linux at the moment, so AMD could beat nVidia.
Comment
-
Originally posted by yoshi314 View Posti wonder who's primarily to blame for poor gfx performance on better cards - driver programmers, hw engineers, or perhaps linux kernel hackers?
Comment
Comment