tant que Xorg et les pilotes libres claquent ^^
Elles sont belles tes oeillères, ou alors, c'est sur le terme "claquent" qu'il y a un quiproquo, ça veut dire "se vautrent comme des loutres"?
Catalyst vs. Mesa Performance With Ubuntu 10.04 If your desktop experience heavily depends upon using OpenGL, the proprietary Catalyst driver for Linux still is really the only option. As our 3D tests show, the Catalyst driver remains many times faster than the classic Mesa Radeon driver in every test -- nearly eight times faster in some tests.
C'est juste une question de temps, ça va maturer tout ça, ah ben non:
R500 Mesa Is Still No Match To An Old Catalyst Driver Lastly, with Urban Terror, the open-source Lucid graphics stack remained much slower than the two and four year old Catalyst drivers. With the Mobility Radeon X1400 on the open-source stack, the game was not even playable
Oups, contre des pilotes de 2006 quand même.
Mais gallium va changer la donne, Though we do know that the performance will improve with Gallium3D as our ATI Gallium3D benchmarks have shown
ah ben non plus:
ATI's Gallium3D Driver Is Still Playing Catch-Up The old Catalyst drivers were still significantly faster.
Nvidia et gallium, zut, c'est pire:
Benchmarks Of Nouveau's Gallium3D Driver (dans Fedora 13)
Neither the 8600GTS nor 9800GTX was playable with this free software game when using the current Nouveau driver stack. When running Warsow at 1920 x 1080, the GeForce 9800GTX was 15x faster with the NVIDIA 195.36.03 beta driver than using the open-source Nouveau driver that uses the Gallium3D driver architecture.
Donc si sur le plan technique les nvidia sont de la merde, ça implique quoi sur les drivers nouveau et radeon? Ils sont encore plus de la merde que la merde? Ca me rappelle un sketch de Coluche.
[^] # Re: Argh
Posté par imr . En réponse au journal Xorg 1.8: épatant ?. Évalué à 10.
Elles sont belles tes oeillères, ou alors, c'est sur le terme "claquent" qu'il y a un quiproquo, ça veut dire "se vautrent comme des loutres"?
Les derniers tests et articles de phoronix.
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=category&item=Disp(...)
Catalyst vs. Mesa Performance With Ubuntu 10.04
If your desktop experience heavily depends upon using OpenGL, the proprietary Catalyst driver for Linux still is really the only option. As our 3D tests show, the Catalyst driver remains many times faster than the classic Mesa Radeon driver in every test -- nearly eight times faster in some tests.
C'est juste une question de temps, ça va maturer tout ça, ah ben non:
R500 Mesa Is Still No Match To An Old Catalyst Driver
Lastly, with Urban Terror, the open-source Lucid graphics stack remained much slower than the two and four year old Catalyst drivers. With the Mobility Radeon X1400 on the open-source stack, the game was not even playable
Oups, contre des pilotes de 2006 quand même.
Mais gallium va changer la donne,
Though we do know that the performance will improve with Gallium3D as our ATI Gallium3D benchmarks have shown
ah ben non plus:
ATI's Gallium3D Driver Is Still Playing Catch-Up
The old Catalyst drivers were still significantly faster.
Nvidia et gallium, zut, c'est pire:
Benchmarks Of Nouveau's Gallium3D Driver (dans Fedora 13)
Neither the 8600GTS nor 9800GTX was playable with this free software game when using the current Nouveau driver stack. When running Warsow at 1920 x 1080, the GeForce 9800GTX was 15x faster with the NVIDIA 195.36.03 beta driver than using the open-source Nouveau driver that uses the Gallium3D driver architecture.
Donc si sur le plan technique les nvidia sont de la merde, ça implique quoi sur les drivers nouveau et radeon? Ils sont encore plus de la merde que la merde? Ca me rappelle un sketch de Coluche.