| |||||||||||||
Packard on the state of Linux graphicsPackard on the state of Linux graphicsPosted Apr 26, 2009 7:34 UTC (Sun) by petegn (guest, #847)Parent article: Packard on the state of Linux graphics
I wish someone would put a nuke up ATI's backside it is absolute junk right now that is if it even installs at all .
If it was possible rip the ATI junk out of my laptop and install and Nvidia graphics system i would but i am stuck with ATI Junk and am sick of their junk .
(Log in to post comments)
Packard on the state of Linux graphics Posted Apr 26, 2009 14:38 UTC (Sun) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]
Without saying which card it is this is, well, as useless as anything
we've come to expect from you.
ATI produce a *lot* of different cards. Some have excellent free support.
Which it is depends on what card you've got (oh, and also what version of
Packard on the state of Linux graphics Posted Apr 27, 2009 7:04 UTC (Mon) by petegn (guest, #847) [Link]
>Without saying which card it is this is, well, as useless as anything
>we've come to expect from you.
Wonder which one of the factory list numbies this is
If you think you know who i am then you obviously know what machine i have it,s graphics adaptor and the versions of fglrx i have tried but for those that genuinely dont know the machine is a Compaq Presario V5030 AMD Turion 64 CPU ATI M200 mobility graphics Opensue 11.1 with the latest (supplied by suse) version of X KDE 4.2.2(ish) 1.0 Gb ram video ram 128Mb(max allowed by bios) .
Most of this information is so widely spread about on the net and i am not the only one that has these problems , Just one of the more vocal people when it comes to getting it sorted and when people start getting snotty and sarcastic they get it bounced straight back at them electronically or face to face it does not bother me at all .
Pete .
Packard on the state of Linux graphics Posted Apr 27, 2009 8:35 UTC (Mon) by k3ninho (subscriber, #50375) [Link]
I don't know SuSE, and you don't say which driver you're using. Are you using the ATI 'fglrx' binary driver, or the open xserver-xorg-ati one? And what's the PCI Id for the card -- it seems possible that the driver doesn't correctly recognise the thing. Does the VESA driver work -- even if at a galatial pace?
Packard on the state of Linux graphics Posted Apr 27, 2009 15:22 UTC (Mon) by ttonino (subscriber, #4073) [Link]
The M200 in the RS480/RS482 chip set worked okay for me with fglrx (though scrolling was slowish on a composited desktop and no xv support).
Since Ubuntu 8.10 the free driver is installed and this works well.
Packard on the state of Linux graphics Posted Apr 27, 2009 15:38 UTC (Mon) by Kit (guest, #55925) [Link]
>ATI M200 mobility graphics
This is a pretty stinking low end card, even as far as mobile graphics cards go (OEMs *love* giving you good processor/ram and then a PATHETIC video card). I had a laptop from the same era as the M200 (but with the 'high end' equivalent) and its performance made the PREVIOUS laptop's graphics card look blazing fast by comparison; the best you can hope for is 'okay' 2D performance and maybe, MAYBE (if you're insanely lucky) basic compositing. I'd say completely ignore the FGLRX (it just adds pain, and generally crashes) and go with the generic radeon driver.
Unless you're okay with basically just VESA level performance, I'd say to NEVER, EVER go with the entry level graphics card (ATI or nVidia, can't comment on Intel since that's really their primary target), can't really fault ATI for the card being so low end (although you can for their FGLRX driver sucking so hard, but then they could have easily just not even bothered with a driver at all... so I'm just gonna go with 'fglrx sucks horribly, but huzzah for releasing specs and working with the community now').
Packard on the state of Linux graphics Posted Apr 27, 2009 16:55 UTC (Mon) by petegn (guest, #847) [Link]
Yes i am now using the standard radeon driver it's not the best of things but works unlike fglrx but having said that the laptop was previously running opensuse 10.3 and it was ok on that but 11.1 Hummmm and 11.0 is not much better . i did think of canning opensuse but i now know the system fairly well so a change would be a real pain just hoping they get 11.2 right for release B4 it is released this time
think it is definately new laptop as soon as funds allow with decent Nvidia graphics
Packard on the state of Linux graphics Posted Apr 27, 2009 23:53 UTC (Mon) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]
If you want decent graphics that doesn't crash, *avoid* nvidia. Everyone
else shares info at least and development time at best with the community, so over time driver support gets *better*; with nvidia, over time driver support gets *worse*, and in the end they drop support for your card and you're shagged (upgrade your kernel *or* have an insecure kernel and working video).
Packard on the state of Linux graphics Posted Apr 28, 2009 2:14 UTC (Tue) by foom (subscriber, #14868) [Link] I agree that it pretty much sucks, but Debian at least packages multiple versions of the nvidia drivers, thus managing to keep users from being totally screwed if they have old hardware.
Packard on the state of Linux graphics Posted Apr 28, 2009 6:08 UTC (Tue) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]
It depends on what you want.
I think that overal the Intel driver is going to provide better stability and better long-term support. Not right now... but if your using something like Debian stable which uses the pre-GEM stuff.. or Fedora 11 which will use the post-GEM stuff.. then it'll be better.
The ATI stuff will provide better long-term support also. The open source OpenGL drivers still work fine with R200 era hardware... which is something that can't be said with proprietary Nvidia drivers which only do support for hardware sold in the last few years and shoves the rest into 'legacy' mode were your using older drivers until they no longer work with modern Linux systems.
However if you want/need to have good top range 3D performance and good compatibility for games and applications then Nvidia is still tops. Nvidia places a very high priority on performance for their drivers and it's obvious that game developers and application developers using Linux and targetting Linux all prefer the Nvidia proprietary drivers. So it's very common to run into situations were games and applications are tested against nothing but proprietary drivers and Nvidia's proprietary OpenGL stack.
So you end up with Nvidia-isms and bugs that happen in the open source OpenGL stack go unnoticed and unfixed. It's often a frustrating experience for people relying on OSS drivers to have to go and tweak settings on their apps in order to get some sort of combination that does not cause software fallbacks or crashes or other such negative things.
There have been a couple times in the past were I've personally run into situations were developers have simply given up trying to get their stuff working well on in a pure-OSS environment. It's not that they were all ra-ra proprietary softwre or anything like that... they were generally real swear-to-god open source developers, but it's just that the combination of low quality, spotty OpenGL support, and lack of demand among end users just left getting stuff working well a low priority. I don't blame them for having that attitude. I've ran into problems related to that in both open source ATI and open source Intel drivers.
A recent example of this is going to be the YoFranky game from the Blender project.
In Fedora 10, using the Intel GMA drivers for the 965 chipset, I couldn't even play the silly thing due to the lackluster OpenGL suppport.. it wasn't that the performance wasn't decent in benchmarks and such (Fedora 10 had the fastest OpenGL in terms of raw performance that I've ran into)it's just that it wasn't compatible with a lot of applications. In many ways Fedora 11 beta offers worse performance, but the stability and compatiblity has improved to the point were I don't have to worry about running most OpenGL applications and games. Now if I disable shaders in the game I can play it on medium quality decent enough... It's still not as pleasent as it should be.
I think that right now a lot of people are complaining about Intel performance and drivers and such.. not becuase there was a sudden drop off in quality (without a doubt the current transition is a rought spot), but that the quality has reached a point were people are beginning to depend on them and now are desiring to have higher quality.
Packard on the state of Linux graphics Posted Apr 28, 2009 23:49 UTC (Tue) by petegn (guest, #847) [Link]
Never had a moments problems with Nvidia at all they always just work as they should have always installed as they should except for one instance and that did not take much to put right a quick soft link and working like a champ Unlike every ATI video card i have come across has been a complete DOG .
No you can keep the ATI stuff I'll have Nvidia any day it is just a crying shame AMD wasted so much money on a 2 bit graphics chip maker like ATI they would have been far far far better off aquireing Nvidia
|
|||||||||||||