Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
Are you happy with your ATI Radeon 3D performance?
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page 1, 2  Next  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Gentoo Chat
View previous topic :: View next topic  

Are you happy with your ATI Radeon 3D performance?
Yes, it is only a bit slower than in window$
12%
 12%  [ 20 ]
Yes, it is indeed faster than in window$
6%
 6%  [ 10 ]
No, those drivers are bull****, I'm getting poor framerates
71%
 71%  [ 112 ]
Uh? What does a video card do? Play videos?
9%
 9%  [ 15 ]
Total Votes : 157

Author Message
MaxDamage
l33t
l33t


Joined: 03 Jan 2004
Posts: 650
Location: Oviedo, Spain

PostPosted: Wed Apr 14, 2004 10:29 pm    Post subject: Are you happy with your ATI Radeon 3D performance? Reply with quote

Just switched from my Geforce2 GTS (fried, too much overclocking for too much tieme :P) to an ATI Radeon 9600 Pro (no laughts, please). This is my system:
Code:
AthlonXP 2000
Gigabyte GA-7VAX (KT400)
512MB DDR 333MHz
ATI Radeon 9600Pro (400/400 MHz)

Just for testing installed Quake2 on my loved Gentoo and on WinXP. I did a benchmark (1024x768, 24bits in Gentoo, 32 in Windows I guess)
Code:
timedemo 1
demomap demo1.dm2

an the results are
Code:
WinXP: 259 FPS
Gentoo: 120 FPS

What the hell? Are ATI drivers for Linux so much crappy??

I would like to know from other ATI users if they are experiencing so much difference. My Radeon works good for me playing Quake3 and so, but I see it is almost as fast as my old Geforce (220/366 Mhz overclocked). Please tell your personal oppinions!!!!

P.S. - glxgears, 1024x768@24bit = 1900FPS if anybody is giving his glxgears benchmark :roll:
_________________
La PDA de tungsteno
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ben2040
Guru
Guru


Joined: 07 May 2003
Posts: 445
Location: UK

PostPosted: Wed Apr 14, 2004 10:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi

They're playable wise the same, in Unreal Tournament 2004, and I also have a Radeon 9600 Pro, yet it gets 2400fps in GLX Gears.

Ben
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
El_Presidente_Pufferfish
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 11 Jul 2002
Posts: 1179
Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Wed Apr 14, 2004 11:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

use the 3.2.8-r1 set
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
IvanHoe
l33t
l33t


Joined: 05 Oct 2002
Posts: 658

PostPosted: Wed Apr 14, 2004 11:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, at least I'm not the only one that's totally unhappy with the ati drivers. I should've saved my money for a GeForce 6800 Ultra.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
chino_
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 05 Apr 2004
Posts: 186
Location: /dev/random

PostPosted: Thu Apr 15, 2004 3:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I got a Radeon 7500 mobility. Need I say more?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
gcasillo
l33t
l33t


Joined: 23 Sep 2003
Posts: 739
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA

PostPosted: Thu Apr 15, 2004 8:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

How excited about switching from my Radeon 9700 Pro to my new FX5950? This is the third thread I've posted to. I have been running the 2.6.x kernels since 2.6.0, and since then, I've experienced hard lockups with my Radeon. The Radeon was performing okay with the 2.4 kernels, but never great compared to what it seemed to do in Windows.

I was getting ~4500fps in glxgears at 1024x768x16bpp with the 3.2.8-r1 ati-drivers. Okay but definitely short of expectations. I seemed to remember getting 6000fps at one point in the 2.4 kernels. But the lockups have been the real bane lately. When ATI released the horrific 3.7.0 and 3.7.6 drivers, I decided enough was enough and went shopping for a nVidia card. I had two FX5200s in a couple other boxes, and despite the FX5200s "entry level" positioning in the video card world, I was impressed with their performances.

So I just got my FX5950 today. Look at these numbers and weep!
Code:

55302 frames in 5.0 seconds = 11060.400 FPS
58324 frames in 5.0 seconds = 11664.800 FPS
58429 frames in 5.0 seconds = 11685.800 FPS
58347 frames in 5.0 seconds = 11669.400 FPS
58419 frames in 5.0 seconds = 11683.800 FPS
58395 frames in 5.0 seconds = 11679.000 FPS
58061 frames in 5.0 seconds = 11612.200 FPS
57943 frames in 5.0 seconds = 11588.600 FPS

To be fair, the FX5950 is a little more recent than my Radeon 9700 Pro, but you can't tell me the Radeon isn't capable of getting within 6000fps of the FX5950. Conclusion: ATI's DRIVERS ARE THE SUCK. That coming from a former ATI zealot. I have defended ATI in the past against the nVidia fanboys, but I'm officially a convert now.

ATI makes great cards, but they proceed to squander any performance you might get from those cards with their drivers, most especially in Linux. Windows might be another matter; I grew to love my Radeon during a Windows gaming spree over the last year or so. But I'm all about Linux now that we're getting some decent, native releases.

Until ATI can build a rock solid reputation for quality drivers, they've lost me.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Riftwing
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 06 Oct 2002
Posts: 293

PostPosted: Thu Apr 15, 2004 9:15 pm    Post subject: Re: Are you happy with your ATI Radeon 3D performance? Reply with quote

MaxDamage wrote:
P.S. - glxgears, 1024x768@24bit = 1900FPS if anybody is giving his glxgears benchmark :roll:


Yea... thats pretty bad. I get around 6600 fps at 1280x1024x24 with my fx 5900xt.
_________________
Good, bad, I'm the guy with the gun. - Ash, Army of Darkness
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MaxDamage
l33t
l33t


Joined: 03 Jan 2004
Posts: 650
Location: Oviedo, Spain

PostPosted: Thu Apr 15, 2004 9:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanx for the answers!! I see as things are actually, ATI's cards are performing very badly compared with what they could do with decent drivers. We will see if ATI changes this in the future...

As I've read in another thread, the explanation for these drivers could be that Nvidia has been for much more time in the Linux market than ATI, so they haven't reached the level of maturity the Detonator drivers had. Anyway they should really show progress with newer releases!! :evil:

I would like you to post real-life benchmarks like quake3 or unreal tournament ones, comparing windows and linux framerates on the same machine. They would be more ultimate. Thanx again for expressing your oppinions :wink:
_________________
La PDA de tungsteno
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Goeland86
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 12 Mar 2004
Posts: 178
Location: Geneva area

PostPosted: Fri Apr 16, 2004 10:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

the problem I'm having is trying to get DRM and DRI working with Xorg... if I succeed I'll let you know, but for the moment I'm stuck with 2D accel only...
that's the problem when you only have an IGP320M... aka Radeon Mobility U1
_________________
The world could be destroyed by a nuclear war and there'll still be Keith Richards with 5 cockroaches: "You know I smoked your uncle right? F*$^ing craazy!" - Robin Williams
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kevmille
Guru
Guru


Joined: 26 Jul 2003
Posts: 311
Location: Ho Chi Minh City (Saigon), Vietnam

PostPosted: Fri Apr 16, 2004 10:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

chino_ wrote:
I got a Radeon 7500 mobility. Need I say more?


Nope. I just had to order a replacement videocard this week and Dell provided me a refurbished, not brand new, Radeon 7500 Mobility graphics card. Of course I had to pay the new price and you are not allowed to upgrade to the Radeon 9000 Mobility.
_________________
My Company: Hakata Consulting
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sapphirecat
Guru
Guru


Joined: 15 Jan 2003
Posts: 376

PostPosted: Sat Apr 17, 2004 2:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm happy with the performance of my 7500. For what I do it's workable, and it has silent cooling out of the box :P Of course, I don't get binary drivers, but I don't have Windows to compare it to, either....
_________________
Former Gentoo user; switched to Kubuntu 7.04 when I got sick of waiting on gcc. Chance of thread necro if you reply now approaching 100%...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
gralves
Guru
Guru


Joined: 20 May 2003
Posts: 389
Location: Sao Paulo, Brazil

PostPosted: Sat Apr 17, 2004 4:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Join the angry mob.... :evil:

http://www.rage3d.com/board/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=61

Look specially at:

http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthread.php?s=&threadid=33733550
http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthread.php?s=&threadid=33746855

This one shows a new perspective (since I never had an nvidia I don't know if he's right)

http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthread.php?s=&threadid=33752719
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
IvanHoe
l33t
l33t


Joined: 05 Oct 2002
Posts: 658

PostPosted: Sat Apr 17, 2004 8:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

gcasillo wrote:
How excited about switching from my Radeon 9700 Pro to my new FX5950? This is the third thread I've posted to. I have been running the 2.6.x kernels since 2.6.0, and since then, I've experienced hard lockups with my Radeon. The Radeon was performing okay with the 2.4 kernels, but never great compared to what it seemed to do in Windows.

I was getting ~4500fps in glxgears at 1024x768x16bpp with the 3.2.8-r1 ati-drivers. Okay but definitely short of expectations. I seemed to remember getting 6000fps at one point in the 2.4 kernels. But the lockups have been the real bane lately. When ATI released the horrific 3.7.0 and 3.7.6 drivers, I decided enough was enough and went shopping for a nVidia card. I had two FX5200s in a couple other boxes, and despite the FX5200s "entry level" positioning in the video card world, I was impressed with their performances.

So I just got my FX5950 today. Look at these numbers and weep!
Code:

55302 frames in 5.0 seconds = 11060.400 FPS
58324 frames in 5.0 seconds = 11664.800 FPS
58429 frames in 5.0 seconds = 11685.800 FPS
58347 frames in 5.0 seconds = 11669.400 FPS
58419 frames in 5.0 seconds = 11683.800 FPS
58395 frames in 5.0 seconds = 11679.000 FPS
58061 frames in 5.0 seconds = 11612.200 FPS
57943 frames in 5.0 seconds = 11588.600 FPS

To be fair, the FX5950 is a little more recent than my Radeon 9700 Pro, but you can't tell me the Radeon isn't capable of getting within 6000fps of the FX5950. Conclusion: ATI's DRIVERS ARE THE SUCK. That coming from a former ATI zealot. I have defended ATI in the past against the nVidia fanboys, but I'm officially a convert now.

ATI makes great cards, but they proceed to squander any performance you might get from those cards with their drivers, most especially in Linux. Windows might be another matter; I grew to love my Radeon during a Windows gaming spree over the last year or so. But I'm all about Linux now that we're getting some decent, native releases.

Until ATI can build a rock solid reputation for quality drivers, they've lost me.

Just for comparison, I have a Radeon 9800 XT (a very expensive card, indeed) and I get ~5000 fps with the default sized window. :x
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jowilly
Guru
Guru


Joined: 22 Jun 2002
Posts: 319

PostPosted: Sat Apr 17, 2004 10:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

IvanHoe wrote:

Just for comparison, I have a Radeon 9800 XT (a very expensive card, indeed) and I get ~5000 fps with the default sized window. :x


I get 4860 on a 9800xt, on a p4 3.2 with 466 mhz corsair dual ddr ram.

What are you running to get 5000 ?

I was getting the same speed with a geforce ti 4600 ... :(
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
placeholder
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 07 Feb 2004
Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Sun Apr 18, 2004 5:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I luckily went with Nvidia for my card, and therefor haven't had problems. However, I have seen my friend's Geforce4 MX440 beat out his Radeon 9800 Pro, and it's quite terrible. I myself am definitely sticking with Nvidia.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
IvanHoe
l33t
l33t


Joined: 05 Oct 2002
Posts: 658

PostPosted: Sun Apr 18, 2004 6:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jowilly wrote:
IvanHoe wrote:

Just for comparison, I have a Radeon 9800 XT (a very expensive card, indeed) and I get ~5000 fps with the default sized window. :x


I get 4860 on a 9800xt, on a p4 3.2 with 466 mhz corsair dual ddr ram.

What are you running to get 5000 ?

I was getting the same speed with a geforce ti 4600 ... :(

It's about the same, I was just rounding up.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
zez
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 13 Jun 2002
Posts: 256
Location: Oregon, United States

PostPosted: Sun Apr 18, 2004 6:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

On my 9800 Pro I get about 4500fps in glxgears (1152x864x24, default window size). It's obvious that all around nVidia's driver support is better, as they already have AMD64/IA64 driveres for Linux and even a set for FreeBSD x86. I've scaled back my Linux gaming, though, so I'm not too disappointed with this card. One oddity, though, is I get some weird color artifacts in the Plastik window decoration when playing video in mplayer w/ xv output. This never happened on my old GeForce3. Of course, I bought this card expecting this situation, so I have nothing to whine about. :lol:
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Raniz
l33t
l33t


Joined: 13 Sep 2003
Posts: 967
Location: Varberg, Sweden

PostPosted: Sun Apr 18, 2004 10:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

MaxDamage wrote:
As I've read in another thread, the explanation for these drivers could be that Nvidia has been for much more time in the Linux market than ATI, so they haven't reached the level of maturity the Detonator drivers had. Anyway they should really show progress with newer releases!! :evil:

If I'm not mistaken Nvidia uses the same drivers for Windows and Linux (in some way). Thus providing excellent drivers for both Win and Lin.

MaxDamage wrote:
I would like you to post real-life benchmarks like quake3 or unreal tournament ones, comparing windows and linux framerates on the same machine. They would be more ultimate. Thanx again for expressing your oppinions :wink:

I haven't got any exact rates, but I've got about 20 fps more in Windows (OGL) than in Linux when I'm playing UT2003.

I've given up 3D Gaming in Linux some time ago because of the poor performance of my R9500Pro :(
I'm definately going for a Nvidia card the next time i upgrade!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Blue Fox
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 09 Apr 2004
Posts: 216

PostPosted: Sun Apr 18, 2004 12:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ATI drivers are completelly fucked! They don't care for Linux consumers.
But I will buy a 6800 Ultra :lol:
_________________
"Never argue with and idiot cuz he bring you down to his level and beat you with experience"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Goeland86
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 12 Mar 2004
Posts: 178
Location: Geneva area

PostPosted: Sun Apr 18, 2004 1:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think that the linux community really ought to write an open letter to ATI asking for more linux support, else we boycott them, and we give them something like 2 or 3 months of time to show that they DO care about linux users. Whaddya think y'all? :?:
_________________
The world could be destroyed by a nuclear war and there'll still be Keith Richards with 5 cockroaches: "You know I smoked your uncle right? F*$^ing craazy!" - Robin Williams
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lews_Therin
l33t
l33t


Joined: 03 Oct 2003
Posts: 657
Location: Banned

PostPosted: Sun Apr 18, 2004 4:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I get ~1000 FPS in glxgears with my 9600. Interestingly, that's actually lower than when I had a 8500 by about 1000. Just thinking about this...maybe the drivers don't take advantage of newer cards, and treat them as generic for some reason?

It actually doesn't matter to me, since I don't game in Linux anyway.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Paranoid
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 07 Jan 2004
Posts: 290
Location: Portland, ME

PostPosted: Sun Apr 18, 2004 7:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am going to buy a nvidia card some time in the near future due to the massive amount of posts about ati problems-considering the price of a good vid card I'd rather not take chances and I have no interest in dual booting with windows 8O .

But....right now I'm running an :oops: 8500. It works pretty damn good most of the time although recently I've had problems with xv & xorg. The only somewhat demanding 3D game I've been playing lately is q2 and it plays very smoothly. My glxgears results:

Code:
jeff@Luna jeff $ glxgears
13096 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2619.200 FPS
13436 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2687.200 FPS
13451 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2690.200 FPS
13438 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2687.600 FPS
13443 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2688.600 FPS
13443 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2688.600 FPS
13441 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2688.200 FPS
13444 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2688.800 FPS
13447 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2689.400 FPS
13446 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2689.200 FPS


As Lews_Therin said, it strikes me as very strange that I'm getting much better fps than many 9000 series cards.
_________________
A paranoid is someone who knows a little of what's going on.
William S. Burroughs
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
IvanHoe
l33t
l33t


Joined: 05 Oct 2002
Posts: 658

PostPosted: Mon Apr 19, 2004 6:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I sent ATI a support email a few days ago asking about the poor performance. All I've recieved so far is an automated response. What a surprise.
:?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mlybarger
Guru
Guru


Joined: 04 Sep 2002
Posts: 475

PostPosted: Mon Apr 19, 2004 12:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ok, so my card isn't exactly a quality ATI radeon. it's a Radeon 7000 VE. Cheep 32MB card that does decent 3d on older games (quake3, tuxracer, foobillards, glbillards, etc). glxgears gives it about the same frame rates as my ati aiw 128pro.

thought, i use the OS drivers, not the ati binary drivers. WTH is that all about? i buy ati b/c they release some specs to the OS community to develop drivers. this binary closed source drivers stuff is crap.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
shift
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 21 Feb 2004
Posts: 146
Location: Vancouver, Canada

PostPosted: Tue Apr 20, 2004 12:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sapphire-Tech ATI Radeon 9000 Pro 128MB
lspci: ATI Technologies Inc Radeon RV250 If [Radeon 9000]
Kernel 2.6.5, KDE 3.2.1, ati-drivers 3.7.6-r1

Quote:

bash-2.05b# glxgears
11278 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2255.600 FPS
11557 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2311.400 FPS
11564 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2312.800 FPS
11560 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2312.000 FPS
11527 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2305.400 FPS


Quote:

bash-2.05b# fgl_glxgears
1720 frames in 5.0 seconds = 344.000 FPS
1758 frames in 5.0 seconds = 351.600 FPS
1757 frames in 5.0 seconds = 351.400 FPS
1752 frames in 5.0 seconds = 350.400 FPS
1756 frames in 5.0 seconds = 351.200 FPS


Sapphire cards do have high specs than their equivalent Built-by-ATI cards.

I guess it's not too bad.

@Paranoid How did you get nearly 2700 with your 8500? Care to share the secrets/tweaks? :D
_________________
Wallpapers:
Gentoo Space
Gentoo Infinity
Gentoo Matrix
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Gentoo Chat All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum