Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 6th May 2006 17:01 UTC, submitted by Phoronix
3D News, GL, DirectX "We have been overwhelmed with requests to take a serious look at the frame-rate performance differences between the various open-source and proprietary contenders. Our first article on this topic, which will likely be the first of a series of examinations, is looking at the differences between the X.Org open-source ATI Radeon driver and that of ATI's official but proprietary fglrx display driver."
Thread beginning with comment 121725
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
stephanem
Member since:
2006-01-11

That's patently false that open source can deliver better drivers.

Tell me do Andrew Morton or Linus Torvalds or Greg KH understand graphics processors?. Heck no!. The people who really understand how ATI or Nvidia processors really work are already employed by ATI and Nvidia respectively. Openeing up the datasheets still means nothing!.

Sound Blaster Audigy drivers on Linux still can't do half of the things Creative's drivers does on Windows and ALSA guys have had the datasheets for years now.

So this is just tripe that OSS programmers can do better drivers than the hardware vendor them selves - tripe fed to you by total and utter NON PRACTICING PROGRAMMERS like Perens, ESD, RMS and all the regular Open Source fan boys.

Reply Parent Score: 1

leech Member since:
2006-01-10

Actually it's been the opinion of many that the Audigy drivers for windows suck majorly. Creative's drivers have been called the worse next to... yeah you guessed it, ATI's. ATI's Windows drivers have gotten better, but Creative's still suck.

I have an Audigy 2 Platinum and guess what, every single thing that it does in Windows also works in Linux, even the remote control works.

About the only thing Alsa doesn't really support is EAX, but that's because EAX is non-existent in games on Linux. Instead they use OpenAL, which is also what Unreal Tournament and a few other games use even in Windows....

Reply Parent Score: 3

stephanem Member since:
2006-01-11

> I have an Audigy 2 Platinum and guess what, every single thing that it does in Windows also works in Linux, even the remote control works.



That's news to me because mine doesn't!. Secondly OpenAL doesn't make use of hardware acceleration in audio. Finally, where's CMSS, where's Environmental Audio, where's Dolby Digital decode/encode? where's DTS?

(note that all these features cost money that Linux people don't have!)

Reply Parent Score: 0

pzad Member since:
2005-12-23

For emu10k1/emu10k2 no one has datasheet. First emu10k1 (sb live) driver was developed by Creative. emu10k2 (Audigy) driver was reverse engineered from debug build of windows driver. No one opensource developer has datasheet for these chips.

Reply Parent Score: 1

flywheel Member since:
2005-12-28

>"That's patently false that open source can deliver >better drivers. "

Well - closed source isn't necessarily better than open source drivers. You're quite right they do have the upper hand, but does not always utilize this 100%.

>"Openeing up the datasheets still means nothing!."

Releasing the specs benefits all 3rd party driver developers, not only the OpenSource developers. There are some commercial 3rd party developers that produce great driver systems, but are inhibited by the hardware developers unvillingness of releasing specs. Almost no hardware delevelopers will release 3D specs, under any circumstance (nVidia won't release any recent specs, not even 2D). This could be problematic since it looks like tomorrows GFX processors will only use emulation for 2D - performed by the 3D engine.

Reply Parent Score: 1