Originally posted by Qaridarium
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Goodbye ATI
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by RealNC View PostThe very annoying lag you get with Catalyst when you enable VSync is gone completely. It seems NVidia has an implementation of desktop VSync that is actually usable.
Originally posted by RealNC View PostThe "radeon" open source driver also didn't suffer from this problem, but it had another one: it would drop a frame or two every second.
Originally posted by RealNC View PostXv works perfectly, both in windowed as well in fullscreen mode. It is tear-free
Originally posted by RealNC View PostPhysX yey!!
Comment
-
Originally posted by RussianNeuroMancer View PostIn my opinion it's unusable because it's doesn't give tear-free experience like Catalyst, R300g/R600g and Intel drivers
The "radeon" open source driver also didn't suffer from this problem, but it had another one: it would drop a frame or two every second.
Xv works perfectly, both in windowed as well in fullscreen mode. It is tear-free
Why you so happy about PhysX? There is just few games that really benefit from PhysX but all this games is single-player.
I like my PC much better now with the NVidia card.Last edited by RealNC; 07 March 2012, 03:44 PM.
Comment
-
I've also switched to nvidia (GTX 560). Solved problems (using closed nvidia driver):- games under wine work,
- accelerated video decoding without problems (more formats supported),
- hibernation/sleep problems solved (under flgrx it usually worked),
- vsync works,
- KDE works without screen problems (seems like uninitialized video memory)
Before I used HD4870, this card is great but only under Windows (it is almost as powerful as my current nvidia card). Using fglrx wasn't so bad, problem was that there were many many small issues that made the overall experience quite hard.
Comment
-
Originally posted by karmakoma View PostI've also switched to nvidia (GTX 560). Solved problems (using closed nvidia driver):
....
Before I used HD4870, this card is great but only under Windows (it is almost as powerful as my current nvidia card). Using fglrx wasn't so bad, problem was that there were many many small issues that made the overall experience quite hard.
HD4870 = GTX260
GTX560 = 2x4870 (at minimum)
Comment
-
Originally posted by crazycheese View PostHD4870 = GTX260
GTX560 = 2x4870 (at minimum)
Here are benches of the 560 Ti vs the 4870. Note that they don't have benches of the plain 560 (non-Ti):
Comment
-
Originally posted by RealNC View PostNo, not by that much. The 560 is usually about 60-70% faster than a 4870 and the 560 Ti is about 70-80% faster. It's very, very rare to see a 2x performance difference.
Here are benches of the 560 Ti vs the 4870. Note that they don't have benches of the plain 560 (non-Ti):
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/304?vs=330
4870 cannot downclock properly as well (all pre R700).
I wonder if we ever will get GPU to work as pluggable CPU cores - plug more and get equivalent boost. On best - without drivers. Would require smp-friendly software or hardware tricks.
Comment
-
Originally posted by GrrlTlak View PostHi,
i can understand your frustration with the state of AMD /ATI driver support in Linux. I myself finally made the switch to Windows 7 after having been "forced to live" with this driver disaster. The open radeon driver does not function due to energy issues and since my notebook really IS a tool and not the center of my being i decided to ditch Linux since there is no fully functional desktop environment when you are a customer of ATI or AMD. The situation and this company really are sucking. The only Linux i have left now resides in my Motorola Defy+ ...
Hope you'll be glad with your all-new graphic chip ;-)
1. Take a Hammer
2. Destroy useless AMD hardware
or
1. Take a paper box
2. Send useless AMD hardware to #radeon
3. Buy chip that is supported (intel or nvidia).
NO ONE IS FORCING YOU TO DO STUPID THINGS.
Also, did you notice that MS has used EXACTLY same tactics against Java? And against Firefox? And with OpenGL/Direct3d(there IS NO POINT IN directx - AT ALL).
AMD has regular sex with microsoft (as in "owned"), end of the story.Last edited by crazycheese; 08 March 2012, 09:57 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by RealNC View PostNo, not by that much. The 560 is usually about 60-70% faster than a 4870 and the 560 Ti is about 70-80% faster. It's very, very rare to see a 2x performance difference.
Here are benches of the 560 Ti vs the 4870. Note that they don't have benches of the plain 560 (non-Ti):
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/304?vs=330
Comment
-
Originally posted by RealNC View PostIt's usable here and works perfectly.
Originally posted by RealNC View PostDo I care if there is or isn't?
Originally posted by RealNC View PostYes.
Originally posted by RealNC View PostI don't play multiplayer games. Except chess.
Comment
Comment