On Tue, 08 Dec 2009 17:33:12 +0100 Sven-Hendrik Haase <sh@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 08.12.2009 11:13, Xavier wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 6:52 AM, David C. Rankin > > <drankinatty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >> On Monday 07 December 2009 09:05:18 and regarding: > >> > >>> I'm confirming this as well. Mine fails at radeon/R200_cp.bin, > >>> though. Loading in rc.conf works alright but the GPU appears to > >>> get very hot. I have no diode on it but it just tries to burn a > >>> hole through my laptop. Again, KMS performance is just as bad as > >>> with kernel 2.6.31. I get better performance without KMS and the > >>> system runs a lot cooler in idle as well. My card is a puny rv250 > >>> (aka Radeon Mobile 9000). > >>> > >>> > >> Sven, > >> > >> I have the RS690M (x1200) card and the gpu used to get so > >> hot with earlier additions of the 1.25x radeonhd driver that it > >> was uncomfortable to rest my palms on the laptop palmrest. AMD > >> really fsck'ed all of the laptop users when it dropped all support > >> for pre-2400 series cards in March automatically converting many > >> fairly new laptops (Q1 2008) to "Legacy" boxes. The fglrx driver > >> did such a marvelous job with gpu powerdown and downclocking that > >> thermal was never an issue and performance was great. Thankfully > >> the radeonhd driver has gotten much better in power management in > >> the past 3 months that I can use the palm rest again, but > >> performance is still way low. Best we can do is keep our fingers > >> crossed -- or go shop nvidia gpu based laptops :p > >> > >> > > > > I am not sure that's a solution at all. > > > > The only way to be sure about long term support is with open source > > drivers. And AMD/ATI position certainly looks better than Nvidia for > > that. > > Just compare both : > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphics_hardware_and_FOSS#ATI.2FAMD -> > > specs for all? the latest chipsets > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphics_hardware_and_FOSS#NVIDIA -> > > nothing,void,nil > > > > Now I know nothing about ati fglrx proprietary drivers, but maybe > > you should know the situation with nvidia. > > 190.42 drivers : only supports geforce 6 !! and newer > > 173xx drivers : support geforce 5 (and newer but no point) > > 96xx drivers : support geforce 4 and some geforce 2 > > > > Note that for the recent Xorg 7.5 release, the 173xx and 96xx lagged > > two weeks behind to get compatible, leaving many users in doubt > > during that period. > > > > And anything older than that is considered legacy and no longer > > supported. It was the 71xx series which stopped working with Xorg > > 7.4 release, quite a while ago... > > > > But maybe in term of open source support and power consumption, > > intel is doing better than ati ? > > I have to admit I don't know these two well. And I am sure things > > are not perfect there either. > > Just don't assume that everything is shiny in Nvidia's world, far > > from that. > > > > > Well then, can I actually expect KMS to run slower than "regular" mode > (because that's what it does) or would it be faster if it worked right > at the driver's current state? I tested both kernel 2.6.31 and 2.6.32 > and both give me about 500 FPS less in glxgears (for what it's worth). > Also, KMS frequently causes kernel panic and all kinds of other > trouble. Changing from vt1 to X is fast, though. > Any tips on this or is this actually the current state of KMS? > Remember, I'm using xf86-video-ati. > > -- Sven-Hendrik Well, I think it depends on support for your card. On my ATI card (age-old X700), while using KMS does gives me less FPS in glxgears, most 3D apps run noticeably _faster_ with less glitches. For example, transparency in Neverball is working properly now while in the older kernel it have been broken for quite some time. I'm using the current 2.6.32 kernel, BTW. Try testing using real application, such as the aforementioned Neverball, to better see the different. Regards, Smith
