Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Radeon vs. RadeonHD Drivers In H1'08

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

  • phoronix
    started a topic Radeon vs. RadeonHD Drivers In H1'08

    Radeon vs. RadeonHD Drivers In H1'08

    Phoronix: Radeon vs. RadeonHD Drivers In H1'08

    For Linux distribution vendors, right now is proving to be an awkward time for them as they decide which ATI driver will ship as the default choice in their spring distribution refresh. The problem used to be whether to ship a binary-only driver in the distribution in order to provide "out of the box" support for all available graphics hardware, but on the ATI/AMD side the software distributors are now facing the challenge of which open-source driver they should call the de facto standard. In this article we are briefly looking at the matter of the xf86-video-ati vs. xf86-video-radeonhd drivers, the highly political issue of AtomBIOS, and what some of the popular Linux distributions are deciding to use this spring.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=12052

  • DragonionS
    replied
    Understood

    For now fglrx can't show video in compiz-fusion without blinking The open source drivers are giving 10-20 FPS in the 3d games in linux for my M56 videocard

    But with radeonhd I've received more stable work than ati. I have X crashed 10 times a day with xf86-video-ati. With radeonhd - no crashes at all. It is important for me

    P.S. Thanks for information about role of these drivers for ATI videocards.

    Leave a comment:


  • bridgman
    replied
    Note that neither radeon nor radeonhd have much to do with 3D -- that is all implemented in the mesa and drm drivers. The X drivers (radeon and radeonhd) just handle modesetting and 2D acceleration. They can either do 2D acceleration themselves or run over drm - but if you want 3D then the 2D acceleration needs to go through drm as well.

    You need (radeon or radeonhd) plus mesa plus drm to get a full accelerated driver stack.

    Leave a comment:


  • DragonionS
    replied
    I am voting for xf86-video-radeonhd. Great driver and I am looking forward for great performance on 3d.

    There should be such driver with support from AMD.

    Leave a comment:


  • bridgman
    replied
    Originally posted by chipsugar View Post
    While all this documentation is good news for linux and for you OSS driver coders I'm curious as to when the r300 chip 3D support (and hence the radeon 9700 3D support) will be up to the level of the fglrx driver. Would anyone who's looked at the dri source and the new documentation be able to hazard a rough, off the record, unofficial guess?
    The general consensus seems to be that serious open-source 3D performance is not going to happen until both TTM and the Gallium re-architecture of the Mesa (3D) driver are in place. Best guess would be between 6 and 12 months.

    I don't think the performance will be as high as fglrx but it should be pretty good.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tillin9
    replied
    As far as fglrx to radeon on r300 parts, I'm fairly sure radeon will be better for you unless you need OpenGL 2.x or raw performance. Of course if you really need either of those, the easy solution is to buy and newer card and use fglrx, with newer parts it has gotten a lot better. My experience is the open source radeon driver on r300 is that it is more stable and easier to configure/ use.

    I've always had artifacting in OpenGL apps with fglrx (I've tried up to 8.42) on my 9700 Pro and on my 9500. Also, depending on release there were watermarking (artifacts in the corner of the screen), instability in Xv apps (i.e. I couldn't use tvtime), crashing the machine on logout, inability to get compiz to work regardless of what I did, and a number of other errors.

    Radeon always worked more or less out of the bag, no artifacting, compiz works, etc. The downside is 2D performance had been slower than fglrx until recently. Now, with all the recent EXA work I think 2D is on par. 3D is around 1/2 to 1/3 speed and of course only up to OpenGL 1.3 is supported. The big annoyance here is WINE uses a lot of OpenGL 2.x features to emulate older DirectX 7&8 calls.

    Please note, I'm not bashing fglrx in general. On my X850 XT at work it runs perfectly and has since 8.38, its just (I think) AMD/ATI is not actively testing r300 parts with it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Regenwald
    replied
    "benchmarks"
    http://tirdc.livejournal.com/21263.html

    Leave a comment:


  • chipsugar
    replied
    While all this documentation is good news for linux and for you OSS driver coders I'm curious as to when the r300 chip 3D support (and hence the radeon 9700 3D support) will be up to the level of the fglrx driver.

    Would anyone who's looked at the dri source and the new documentation be able to hazard a rough, off the record, unofficial guess?

    Leave a comment:


  • bridgman
    replied
    Yep. The per-chip defaulting is pretty recent so I don't know if it's right in all cases, but that's certainly where we're heading and it seems to be working properly from what I have seen.

    Leave a comment:


  • Melcar
    replied
    Originally posted by d2kx View Post
    The fglrx driver is working very well for many/most users now. Just install it, change your xorg.conf and add

    Option "TexturedVideo"
    and maybe
    Option "TexturedVideoSync"

    to your Device section.

    For better 2D acceleration (still experimental, but works & improves the performance for me)

    Option "Textured2D"
    Option "TexturedXrender"

    If you do not want to use the fglrx driver, I'd recommend the RadeonHD driver, built by git (because Ubuntu uses v1.1 which is three months old).

    The improvement over Vesa is that you will have all the colours (I think vesa is only 16Bit - correct me if I'm wrong) and will have 2D acceleration (you should notice that things go slowly, e.g. when moving windows).
    Textured Video should be enabled by default on some cards. It is on mine (HD2900XT) and according to Bridgman in a previous post, it should also be the case for all AVIVO chips:

    Originally posted by bridgman View Post
    As I understand it, for pre-Avivo parts (anything up to X1050) we enable VideoOverlay by default, since that arguably offers the best combination of video quality and low CPU utilization. On the Avivo parts (X12xx and up), which have a less capable overlay processor but more shader power, we enable Textured Video by default.

    If you have a pre-Avivo GPU but are using a compositing desktop, you would probably want to enable Textured Video rather than VideoOverlay, but the installer isn't smart enough to do that for you yet.
    http://www.phoronix.com/forums/showt...t=6585&page=19

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X