Tom Horsley wrote:
Just for curiosity, are there known issues with 3D performance
and the Radeon HD 2400 card? The system I have at work
contains a card lspci describes as:
01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: ATI Technologies Inc RV610 video device [Radeon HD 2400 PRO]
I've tried the radeon driver (installed by default in f10),
the radeonhd driver, and the fglrx driver from rpmfusion,
and 3D performance basically sucks with all of them.
Try to run some game like neverputt and the sucks up
the whole CPU and can't move the images smoothly
at all. The glxgears programs says something like 150 to 200
fps for all the versions of the driver.
I don't really have any need for 3d, but I was experimenting
and wondered why a much newer card on a faster system than
an ati system I have at home has such terrible performance
compared to my older ati card at home.
You call that new and still can't perform?
I have a HD4870 and it can't run most of the available free games like
Enemy Territory at an usable fps. This very card is insanely fast on XP,
but it basically does the bare minimums on GNU/Linux. To put numbers to
that, I get a steady frame rate of 100-120fps on windows with some
extremely graphics heavy games, whereas on F10 I get below 20fps or
segfaults.
The fglrx drivers _are_ improving, but very slowly. I went from not
being able to boot to GUI, to being able play fullscreen videos or turn
on the basic desktop cube and play in 4 and half months. So I am _not_
regretting my decision to buy this hardware yet. Maybe in a few months I
wouldn't need to boot to my XP partition at all. :)
PS: the free drivers still can't boot to runlevel 5.
--
Suvayu
Open source is the future. It sets us free.
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
