AMD R9 290: Not Good For Linux Users

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
The alternative OS gurus at Phoronix posted an article today that claims the Radeon R9 290 is still not good for Linux users.

Even with succeeding updates we still found the R9 290 Linux performance to be poor -- and that's for the high-performance Catalyst driver over the open-source RadeonSI Gallium3D-based driver. In this article are fresh benchmarks of the high-end NVIDIA GeForce and AMD Radeon graphics cards from Ubuntu Linux using the latest beta graphics drivers.
Click to expand...
 
Wonder if any of them know they can dual-boot to Windows, if State-of-the-Art performance is what they're looking for...? (facetious question.)
 
WaltC said:
Wonder if any of them know they can dual-boot to Windows, if State-of-the-Art performance is what they're looking for...? (facetious question.)
Click to expand...

Oh hush, you! This is the year of Linux!
 
Well with SteamOS coming it's good that they are complaining about it's performance. AMD needs to fix their drivers for SteamOS or fall further behind. Nvidia is light years ahead of AMD in Linux performance at this point. The fact you can dual boot is irrelevant as some people will build dedicated SteamOS boxes. If I put Windows on it then I'll just boot into Windows and never learn Linux. Which defeats the purpose of building the thing in the first place. :)
 
If you have Windows already on your gaming PC, theres not a lot of point using SteamOS unless they start having exclusive games.
I'll get the Steambox controller and use it on my PC :)
 
Nenu said:
If you have Windows already on your gaming PC, theres not a lot of point using SteamOS unless they start having exclusive games.
I'll get the Steambox controller and use it on my PC :)
Click to expand...

You mean aside from building a separate media center gaming box? Lots of people run multiple boxes - SteamOS eliminates about $100 +/- that would normally go to Windows licenses.
 
cageymaru said:
Well with SteamOS coming it's good that they are complaining about it's performance. AMD needs to fix their drivers for SteamOS or fall further behind. Nvidia is light years ahead of AMD in Linux performance at this point. The fact you can dual boot is irrelevant as some people will build dedicated SteamOS boxes. If I put Windows on it then I'll just boot into Windows and never learn Linux. Which defeats the purpose of building the thing in the first place. :)
Click to expand...

This guy gets it. :D
 
ClariorHincHonos said:
You mean aside from building a separate media center gaming box? Lots of people run multiple boxes - SteamOS eliminates about $100 +/- that would normally go to Windows licenses.
Click to expand...

Why not use your Windows Gaming PC, then you dont need to spend even more money on more hardware?
It can easily be a media player too.

If you already run multiple boxes and wish to stay that way, fair enough.
I said there isnt a lot of point, this would fit into the few cases where it can work out well for you when you already have a good spec gaming PC.

For those wondering whether they should get a steambox who already have a decent gaming PC, I havent seen any compelling reason to get a steambox.
The opposite, it cant play all the games Windows can.
I'm not against the Steambox, quite the opposite, but its place needs to be established.
 
ATi/AMD driver have never been great. Not even on Windows. This was no surprise. Some time last year I tried Fedora, uBuntu and OpenSUSE on an Acer laptop with a 5850 Mobile. Other than the usual pains of getting all the prerequisite packages, the reference 13.4 driver would boot to a black screen on all distros. I'm not sure if they fixed it with the 13.10 driver but it let me wishing that I could swap the graphics card to NVidia.

A R9 290 on a Steam box?! Overkill and Loud come to mind. Want to learn Linux? Virtual Machine!
 
People who run AMD on Linux tend to do it for mining and not for gaming which is lacking on Linux anyway. While it's nice to have equivalent performing drivers for both OS platforms I'd rather they focus on Windows drivers first where the games are abundant and the area where Nvidia needs to improve.
 
This isn't really news. Linux only really works properly on 2 year old hardware. This is one of the biggest issues with Linux, it's not a big priority for hardware manufacturers.

Very annoying.
 
Quix said:
This isn't really news. Linux only really works properly on 2 year old hardware. This is one of the biggest issues with Linux, it's not a big priority for hardware manufacturers.

Very annoying.
Click to expand...

That's actually not completely accurate.

You'll notice that Intel GPUs have driver support even before product release (e.g., Broadwell) and NVIDIA always has first-day support for their GPUs.

In terms of GPU vendors, AMD is definitely out on their own.
 
Nenu said:
Why not use your Windows Gaming PC, then you dont need to spend even more money on more hardware?
It can easily be a media player too.

If you already run multiple boxes and wish to stay that way, fair enough.
I said there isnt a lot of point, this would fit into the few cases where it can work out well for you when you already have a good spec gaming PC.

For those wondering whether they should get a steambox who already have a decent gaming PC, I havent seen any compelling reason to get a steambox.
The opposite, it cant play all the games Windows can.
I'm not against the Steambox, quite the opposite, but its place needs to be established.
Click to expand...

Well, for one thing, I refuse to give Microsoft one more red cent of my money. Cryengine is being developed for Linux, as is Unreal Engine and others. The days of Windows dominance in gaming is coming to an end, and I for one, will be dancing on their grave!
 
jnemesh said:
Well, for one thing, I refuse to give Microsoft one more red cent of my money. Cryengine is being developed for Linux, as is Unreal Engine and others. The days of Windows dominance in gaming is coming to an end, and I for one, will be dancing on their grave!
Click to expand...

It isn't coming to an end. Not even close. There is yet to be a single triple A game for Linux by a big publisher. SteamOS has yet to become even remotely popular. Now I truly hope Linux becomes a viable gaming platform, but its probably several years away at least before triple a games even start coming out on Linux.
 
jnemesh said:
Well, for one thing, I refuse to give Microsoft one more red cent of my money. Cryengine is being developed for Linux, as is Unreal Engine and others. The days of Windows dominance in gaming is coming to an end, and I for one, will be dancing on their grave!
Click to expand...

Very confusing reply.
You wouldnt be giving Microsoft anything.
The whole point of continuing to use your current gaming machine is so you dont have to do anything more.
It costs nothing extra.
 
Nenu said:
Why not use your Windows Gaming PC, then you dont need to spend even more money on more hardware?
It can easily be a media player too.

If you already run multiple boxes and wish to stay that way, fair enough.
I said there isnt a lot of point, this would fit into the few cases where it can work out well for you when you already have a good spec gaming PC.

For those wondering whether they should get a steambox who already have a decent gaming PC, I havent seen any compelling reason to get a steambox.
The opposite, it cant play all the games Windows can.
I'm not against the Steambox, quite the opposite, but its place needs to be established.
Click to expand...

Because my living room and my office are quite a good distance apart. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top