Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 6th Oct 2006 14:02 UTC, submitted by Michael Larabel
3D News, GL, DirectX "Open-source support has appeared by default in X.Org 7.1 for R300 generation GPUs. While ATI does not officially support these R300 open-source drivers, this alternative have been gaining momentum with users largely due to the lack of GLX_EXT_texture_from_pixmap support in fglrx. This extension is needed for the AIGLX desktop eye-candy. These drivers do lack TV-out support and many other features found within ATI's fglrx drivers, but how does its performance compare?"
Thread beginning with comment 169126
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Is this guy on crack?
by GhePeU on Fri 6th Oct 2006 15:58 UTC in reply to "Is this guy on crack?"
Member since:

I could care less if I'm using open source drivers or not. What I want in drivers (of any kind) is performance and reliability. When there are differences in performance of 44fps to 131fps it's no contest.

Well, the problem is that the benchmark regarded the only closed source drivers advantage: 3D performance. Search for fglrx drivers on Google, or on the most important linux forums or mailing lists, you'll get an infinite list of complains. If my memory does not fail me in the last years the closed source drivers released by ATI broke (or are still breaking) a number of things, including switching to a console from X and switching back. To not mention that ATI notoriously release the drivers seldom and untimely. This was not a problem some years ago, but now the development has a different pace, and ATI users are forced to lag back for months with outdated software.

Reply Parent Score: 3