Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Dirty List Of GPUs With Open-Source Drivers Gone Wildly Wrong

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

  • The Dirty List Of GPUs With Open-Source Drivers Gone Wildly Wrong

    Phoronix: The Dirty List Of GPUs With Open-Source Drivers Gone Wildly Wrong

    This morning I shared the list of the 60+ graphics cards being tested under Linux for a set of very interesting articles coming up in the days ahead in this massive Linux graphics comparison in celebration of Phoronix.com's 10th birthday next week. While all of the graphics cards were tried, with the open-source drivers there were notable failures with both the AMD Radeon and Nouveau drivers...

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

  • aht0
    replied
    Originally posted by stevenc View Post
    I'd be interested to know if any of the failed AMD cards work better with FreeBSD 10's radeonkms.
    Latest '11.2' has amdgpu driver, which should now light up those R9 cards as well. Might as well test it all the way

    Leave a comment:


  • Aeder
    replied
    Will this list ever get revisited in a new article?

    Leave a comment:


  • smitty3268
    replied
    Originally posted by Morpheus View Post
    So why doing it on his hardware then ? Not all people run Linux software on less-than-a-year hardware. The ultrabook may be very cool, but I'm not a rich guy that can afford change my hardware each year. Doing the same tests (multiple kernels with power monitoring) on an older hardware makes sense.

    Hardware support for older machines was already mentionned as becoming sometimes problematic. It IS interesting to see the kernel comparison then.
    I'm not saying whether it's interesting or not. That's a personal opinion. What i'm saying is that it's useless to you if you are trying to figure out what will happen on your machine. The only way to see that is to do it yourself and find out.

    Laptops all have pretty specialized hardware, a comparison with more standard desktop hardware would be a lot more comparable.

    Leave a comment:


  • Morpheus
    replied
    So why doing it on his hardware then ? Not all people run Linux software on less-than-a-year hardware. The ultrabook may be very cool, but I'm not a rich guy that can afford change my hardware each year. Doing the same tests (multiple kernels with power monitoring) on an older hardware makes sense.

    Hardware support for older machines was already mentionned as becoming sometimes problematic. It IS interesting to see the kernel comparison then.

    Leave a comment:


  • smitty3268
    replied
    Originally posted by Morpheus View Post
    When I ask Michael on Twitter about testing older hardware when comparing kernel releases (regarding power consuption), he responds that it's not interesting. I have a six years old laptop, I'm not sufficiently skilled to run the tests myself, but I want to know if newer kernel can help gain battery life. I'm not interesting, according to Michael. But I can't afford buy a 1000€+ laptop with top-notch components.
    Power usage will depend heavily on what drivers you are using - what hardware your laptop has. I doubt any comparison michael did would mean much anyway, since it would be completely different hardware from what you are running.

    Leave a comment:


  • Morpheus
    replied
    When I ask Michael on Twitter about testing older hardware when comparing kernel releases (regarding power consuption), he responds that it's not interesting. I have a six years old laptop, I'm not sufficiently skilled to run the tests myself, but I want to know if newer kernel can help gain battery life. I'm not interesting, according to Michael. But I can't afford buy a 1000?+ laptop with top-notch components.

    Leave a comment:


  • stqn
    replied
    Originally posted by Detructor View Post
    2005 called. They want their hardware back.
    My father?s PC*contains a Radeon 9200 SE from 2004, and it is working fine (under Xubuntu 12.04 with a 1680?1050 screen). It can be useful to have recent information about old hardware (for example I?m trying to compare an Athlon 64 3000+ to recent processors, and it?s almost impossible to find any comparison).

    Leave a comment:


  • agd5f
    replied
    Originally posted by Michael View Post
    The firmware should fix it, but AFAIK, even with current kernel Git the R7 260X re-clocking support is still disabled by default.
    It's enabled by default when the new firmware is loaded.

    Leave a comment:


  • chrisb
    replied
    Originally posted by Bryce Harrington View Post
    You forgot to link to the detailed bug reports you filed upstream on each of the issues you found.
    Bryce, serious question.. one of the most common (several times a day) installation failures reported on AskUbuntu.com is basically "I tried to install 14.04 but at boot graphics fail/hangs" - the majority of these reports appear to be failures in radeon or nouveau - is there any point in reporting these on Launchpad? The obvious answer might be "yes" but I wonder if a) upstream is too far ahead of 14.04 for reports to be relevant, and b) whether "fails on radeon HDx (or nvidia x)" alone is sufficient information to help? Or is there anything else that you could do to get useful information from these reports (I guess most users would be happy to download and boot a test diagnostics iso for you, if you made one available).

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X