Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Early AMD Catalyst 12.3 Linux Drivers Seep Out

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

  • DaemonFC
    replied
    They're unstable to the point of crashing the X server randomly when something tries to create an OpenGL context.

    Leave a comment:


  • allquixotic
    replied
    Look here if you get the Unsupported Hardware or Testing Only watermarks.

    Leave a comment:


  • kir?
    replied
    Did they fix the input lag when using vsync in games? If not, when will they fix it?

    Leave a comment:


  • DaemonFC
    replied
    Originally posted by zbiggy View Post
    @DanL We talk here about Catalyst for Linux. Not open source driver. With Catalyst OpenGL2 is not available when compositing is on according to KDE developer's blog who is responsible for graphics..
    It's possible to force it if you want the kind of glitches that GNOME Shell users are experiencing. Plus the driver crashes if you try to run two apps that want direct rendering at once.

    Leave a comment:


  • dekomote
    replied
    Originally posted by devius View Post
    I'd still like to add that the quality of the desktop experience is much worse with Radeons than it is either with Intel or nVidia gpus. In fact, the composited desktop experience (smoothness, responsiveness, number of rendering bugs) with Radeons is similar or worse to what you get on a measly 1st gen Atom netbook with it's crappy GMA950 gpu. This is when using either open source drivers or fglrx.
    This might have been true at some point. But now, I compared same instance of Archlinux + KDE 4.7 with full compositing on a radeon HD5770 and an NVidia 240. Both with blobs. The NV sucks! You can't resize a window. It's slow as hell. Radeon flies through tho. I also tested with Nvidia 440, Ati 4650, HD3000. ATIs were superior with both, the blob and the open source drivers.

    Don't think that the NVidia blob is perfect. I sold my NVidia and got me an ATI. I had issues with switching VTs, dual screen etc. At least I know, if the blob sucks, I can use the open source drivers, and they will preform great.

    Leave a comment:


  • bridgman
    replied
    Originally posted by zbiggy View Post
    Direct2d is another AMD attempt to accelerate Linux but this M$ api does not fit to Linux. Nvidia wins again by taking different approach: they have universal core, with acceleration of everything and thin layers between core and os no matter if it is solaris/linux/bsd or windows. Nvidia knows that no matter what os is used all users want the same:OpenGL/accelerated video and 2D/power management. AMD again goes silly way: make driver for Windows and try to port it to Linux in spare time.
    We re-used the Direct2D switch variable (controlled by a registry key in Windows and an amdpcsdb key in Linux), not the actual acceleration code. The APIs are really different.

    After people started getting excited that we were supporting Direct2D (which we weren't) we changed to a different switch name to avoid confusion.

    This has been explained a few times already.

    Leave a comment:


  • zbiggy
    replied
    @DanL We talk here about Catalyst for Linux. Not open source driver. With Catalyst OpenGL2 is not available when compositing is on according to KDE developer's blog who is responsible for graphics.

    xvba: xbmc is only one application and only h.264 and vc-1 are supported. Not much.
    Open source driver uses shaders for decoding which increases heat and power consumption. UVD is left unused. So uvd/xvba are dead parts of silicon on Linux only wasting power.

    ATI always had bad drivers. Now situation improves on Windows but Linux support is only slight better than before. AMD gained better drivers by publishing docs. When Nvidia presented vdpau first time gave to community open source vdpau library, docs and patches to ffmpeg and mplayer for instant use. AMD made from XvBA secret by silently introducing additional xvba files which discovered and described Michael from Phoronix. Then AMD said that hackers will hack this api easily and provide support for players. This was crazy. This way AMD lost battle for being dominant video api on Linux. Nvidia won and Intel took second place.

    Direct2d is another AMD attempt to accelerate Linux but this M$ api does not fit to Linux. Nvidia wins again by taking different approach: they have universal core, with acceleration of everything and thin layers between core and os no matter if it is solaris/linux/bsd or windows. Nvidia knows that no matter what os is used all users want the same:OpenGL/accelerated video and 2D/power management. AMD again goes silly way: make driver for Windows and try to port it to Linux in spare time.

    Leave a comment:


  • allquixotic
    replied
    Originally posted by devius View Post
    I'm an AMD fan since the golden Athlon days, but I have to agree with zbiggy on his assessment. On top of all those points I'd still like to add that the quality of the desktop experience is much worse with Radeons than it is either with Intel or nVidia gpus. In fact, the composited desktop experience (smoothness, responsiveness, number of rendering bugs) with Radeons is similar or worse to what you get on a measly 1st gen Atom netbook with it's crappy GMA950 gpu. This is when using either open source drivers or fglrx.
    I can't spill the beans, but I have to urge you to wait a month before making your final determination on Catalyst.... something extremely interesting may or may not be in testing right now.

    Leave a comment:


  • DanL
    replied
    Originally posted by devius View Post
    In fact, the composited desktop experience (smoothness, responsiveness, number of rendering bugs) with Radeons is similar or worse to what you get on a measly 1st gen Atom netbook with it's crappy GMA950 gpu. This is when using either open source drivers or fglrx.
    That's funny because my lowly RadeonHD 4550 runs Compiz or Kwin smoothly with open-source drivers..

    AMD: created XvBA with simple MPEG-2, H.264 and VC-1. No player uses this so XvBA is useless which means it could not exist at all.
    It took a while, but xbmc finally makes use of libxvba, and the open-source drivers are working towards shader-based acceleration (and possibly using UVD).

    What does AMD put in this 100MB driver?
    Probably a lot of app-specific optimizations that carried over from Windows.

    Leave a comment:


  • devius
    replied
    I'm an AMD fan since the golden Athlon days, but I have to agree with zbiggy on his assessment. On top of all those points I'd still like to add that the quality of the desktop experience is much worse with Radeons than it is either with Intel or nVidia gpus. In fact, the composited desktop experience (smoothness, responsiveness, number of rendering bugs) with Radeons is similar or worse to what you get on a measly 1st gen Atom netbook with it's crappy GMA950 gpu. This is when using either open source drivers or fglrx.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X