AMD RadeonSI Gallium3D Performance For 4K Linux Gaming

[curaga]

Thats just the box spec, it's outdated.

Much more then that, the HD6000 series with the 11.10 drivers or newer support resolutions up to 16000x16000 http://www.dailytech.com/AMD+Video+C...ticle23159.htm

That's the eyefinity (/total) resolution, the question is how much can the connector built in to the 6k cards handle in one screen.

[Kivada]

Well, that somewhat depends on the screen you're using. If you're running a 40" TV like these benchmarks, then yeah, the PPI isn't much better than a standard monitor. But if you're running a 24" desktop monitor, that's a very different story - that *is* going to be somewhere in the vicinity of 200 PPI.

The Samsung Galaxy S5 Prime has a 5.1" 2560x1440 screen for 575.92 PPI, The closest thing on a normal computer screen is the Toshiba Satellite P50t-B laptop's 15.6" 3840x2160 screen which is 282.42PPI.

I want cellphone level PPI on all of my screens, jagies then become irrelevant as there literally are more pixels then you can possibly see. Though to do that in a resource efficient way you'd have to have resolution independence and probably displayport straight to the panel like you see with Apple's retina displays when you take them apart. I.E. theres no hardware in between the screen and the GPU, you want to talk about a low input latency screen...

[Kivada]

AMD specs for 6870 say the max res is 2560x1600.

Thats just the box spec, it's outdated.

One of the devs (i think agd5f??) said that 6850 card can do 4k with DP1.2 when i asked the same thing.

Much more then that, the HD6000 series with the 11.10 drivers or newer support resolutions up to 16000x16000 http://www.dailytech.com/AMD+Video+C...ticle23159.htm

[Delgarde]

The problem is since the screen is so large, the PPI is nowhere near what a smartphone has. You really need at least around 200 PPI from a monitor before jaggies start disappearing without AA.

Well, that somewhat depends on the screen you're using. If you're running a 40" TV like these benchmarks, then yeah, the PPI isn't much better than a standard monitor. But if you're running a 24" desktop monitor, that's a very different story - that *is* going to be somewhere in the vicinity of 200 PPI.

[liam]

They never correctly initialized my old Dell 30" LCD, and I haven't bothered to try uninstalling Catalyst yet, sorry.

What do you mean by initialized? At a min you should have vesa compliance with any oss driver, which every monitor, tmk, understands. Not fast but it should turn on and the display controller should be sending the correct signals from the fb.

[hubick]

How are the oss drivers?

They never correctly initialized my old Dell 30" LCD, and I haven't bothered to try uninstalling Catalyst yet, sorry.

[89c51]

AMD specs for 6870 say the max res is 2560x1600.

One of the devs (i think agd5f??) said that 6850 card can do 4k with DP1.2 when i asked the same thing.

[Adarion]

Impressive results, showing that good progress with the free driver.
Still I would not use 4K for anything right now. It's horribly expensive, especially when you want some decent image quality (e.g. IPS), it will use a lot of power and most of my machines are far from 4K capable. Also software needs to go with it. But impressive anyway. I am however looking forward to a tiny little system (AM1 based) for writing but with a 1920x1200 (16:10 at least) IPS panel. Pivot included so I could probably turn it 90? and use that config for typing.
But 4K is out of my reach for the next time.

[schmidtbag]

personally, I have one.you just have to rethink the way you work. Split screen everything.

If I used a system for EVERYTHING, including movies, games, and work then this would be a decent idea. But that also means whatever I split ends up being pretty small, unless I pay extra for a huge display. I would much rather buy 2-4 monitors if I'm going to constantly split screen everything.

[schmidtbag]

I do have a KVM switch but never use it.... My setup works. Sometimes I end up using 4+ keyboards, monitors, and mouse simultaneously.... One computer for my emails / article writing / Internet surfing / business tasks. Then anywhere from 1~3 systems concurrently running benchmarks. Then usually a separate system when I'm working on / testing PTS/Phoromatic/OB code. I prefer having dedicated monitors so I can see when a test is done (albeit PTS can also email / txt me) but especially for making sure the system doesn't hang or that when running any graphics tests there are no artifacts or anything, so will be monitoring them with my peripheral vision.

I guess if it works for you then no point in changing it. I wonder though - maybe you could take one of your retired benchmark PCs, get a few HDMI capture cards, and use it to display and control at least 4 PCs at a time. You can easily do split screen that way and resize each display however you want. Or, perhaps you could run the tests through SSH. Up to you obviously, I'm just throwing out suggestions.