How well do AMD Radeon cards run on Wine now? From past experience, I wasn't able to get as many games to run with an ATI Radeon compared to Nvidia.
Most games will just work with AMD GPU on wine. BUT... 1) Sadly many games (specially Direct3D games) will suffer from terrible performance. They will crawl at about 10-50% the frame rate they would run on Windows in the same machine. 2) Catalyst / fglrx is still a terrible piece of software. And I think it will always be. 3) There are the open source drivers, but they will always be following a moving target, and will never support the whole thing. 4) Catalyst drivers share part of the code between Windows and Linux, but they seem to be optimized for Windows / Direct3D only. OpenGL performance is terrible, even on Windows. On windows, games that have both Direct3D and OpenGL renderers will run much much faster with the Direct3D renderer than with the OpenGL renderer (World of Warcraft for example). Trust me, get the Nvidia.
jjmckenzie wrote:> On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 8:15 PM, phildaman46 <wineforum-user at winehq.org> wrote: > > > Thanks for the response. I'm already using an Nvidia GTX 560 and have most of my games running in Wine with no > > problems. I was just curious to know if AMD GPUs have improved since I last used them. Looks like they haven't as I > > suspected. Thanks for clearing that up. > > > > It is not that the AMD/ATI video cards are poor, just the drivers. > Intel video is junk, all around. For now, nVidia is leading the way > for high quality Linux video drivers. That may never change unless > AMD/ATI sees a large move to Linux. I've been there with ATI and > another OS back in the 1990s. > > JamesI totally agree with you on that. I think AMD/ATI drivers work fine with native games in Linux. It just doesn't convert DirectX calls to OpenGL in Wine very well. If you only use Windows, either card should work fine. It's just a matter of whether you want 3D or Eyefinity.
jjmckenzie wrote:> No Linux video driver does DirectX to OpenGL conversions, Wine does > that. The problem is the speed of conversions and whether OpenGL is > running in software or hardware. nVidia appears to use their GPU to > do OpenGL calls and AMD/ATI uses software. Thus the slowdown when > Wine does the call conversion and then again when the OpenGL call is > converted again to proprietary calls for the video card. > Again, this is how it appears. This may not be how the conversions > are actually completed. > > JamesRight, Wine does the conversions through the CPU and GPU. I guess what I meant was AMD/ATI doesn't manage Wine conversions very well.
Fr??d??ric Delanoy wrote:> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 14:03, DaVince <wineforum-user at winehq.org> wrote: > > > > > I know it's off-topic, but could you direct me to a place that can help you get Optimus stuff working? My laptop has to use the Intel GPU for everything right now and Wine doesn't want to work with it, so I'd love to have Optimus working. > > > > Look for bumblebee/ironhideAlright, thanks.
jjmckenzie wrote:> wrote: > > No Linux video driver does DirectX to OpenGL conversions, Wine does > that. The problem is the speed of conversions and whether OpenGL is > running in software or hardware. nVidia appears to use their GPU to > do OpenGL calls and AMD/ATI uses software. Thus the slowdown when > Wine does the call conversion and then again when the OpenGL call is > converted again to proprietary calls for the video card. > Again, this is how it appears. This may not be how the conversions > are actually completed. >Hi! Excuse me, can't find answer with googling. So, asking here, therefore: 1. Are those conversions or translations using CPU to process the DX>OpenGL calls on the fly? 2. Why it needs to be converted? Does it affects on performance? Sorry for off-topic. Don't want to create another for these, as seems, related questions. =)