Yihahaha, the Open Source DRI modules for the radeon M9 do rock on Xfree 4.3.0.
Here is a brief comparaison:
Radeon vs fglrx :
-Pros : increased stability, ability to use properly all resolutions, DGA extension non proprietary ( needed for correct full screen apps and mouse control in fullscreen ), Same motion compensation in Video Overlay ( Xv version 2.2 ).
As well, when i played OpenGL based 3D games ( quake2, quake3, RtCW etc... ), my processor was always maxing out at 100 %. No matter what. Even a glxgears with the ATI prop drivers will max it out, making the box very hot, and forcing me to throttle the processor to at least 25 % for long games.
But the radeon DRI module, not !!! I play quake3 Arena with no throttle and use only 20/30 % of my 2.4 Ghz processor. Much more stable, i can leave the gamme running for ages with no bad high temperature at all. Please let me know if any can observe this as well.
Cons: Umm, well performance is lower. The Mesa OpenGL library has far less extensions than the ATI provided one, especially pBuffers extensions and textures compressions for ut2k3. So i am afraid, NO ut2k3 on the DRI radeon modules. I have dropped something like 10/30 fps average compare to the ATI drivers, on all games. ;(
Tips:
--When you have Xfree 4.3.0 running accelerated with the radeon module, it default to agp x1. This is why i believe some of us have VERY low performance. To change this, just add the line Option "AGPMode" "4" in the driver section, like this:
Section "Device"
Identifier "ATI 9000 Mobility"
Driver "radeon"
# VideoRam 65536
Option "AGPMode" "4"
# Insert Clocks lines here if appropriate
EndSection
If you want to know all the avalaible options of the radeon drivers, here:
http://www.xfree86.org/4.3.0/radeon.4.html
Overall, yes the ATI drivers kick when it comes to performance. Remember that the DRI is in constant developpement, and if you cvs the latest source code, you already will have an improvement over the stock Radeon module of Xfree 4.3.0. Please comment.
Here is a brief comparaison:
Radeon vs fglrx :
-Pros : increased stability, ability to use properly all resolutions, DGA extension non proprietary ( needed for correct full screen apps and mouse control in fullscreen ), Same motion compensation in Video Overlay ( Xv version 2.2 ).
As well, when i played OpenGL based 3D games ( quake2, quake3, RtCW etc... ), my processor was always maxing out at 100 %. No matter what. Even a glxgears with the ATI prop drivers will max it out, making the box very hot, and forcing me to throttle the processor to at least 25 % for long games.
But the radeon DRI module, not !!! I play quake3 Arena with no throttle and use only 20/30 % of my 2.4 Ghz processor. Much more stable, i can leave the gamme running for ages with no bad high temperature at all. Please let me know if any can observe this as well.
Cons: Umm, well performance is lower. The Mesa OpenGL library has far less extensions than the ATI provided one, especially pBuffers extensions and textures compressions for ut2k3. So i am afraid, NO ut2k3 on the DRI radeon modules. I have dropped something like 10/30 fps average compare to the ATI drivers, on all games. ;(
Tips:
--When you have Xfree 4.3.0 running accelerated with the radeon module, it default to agp x1. This is why i believe some of us have VERY low performance. To change this, just add the line Option "AGPMode" "4" in the driver section, like this:
Section "Device"
Identifier "ATI 9000 Mobility"
Driver "radeon"
# VideoRam 65536
Option "AGPMode" "4"
# Insert Clocks lines here if appropriate
EndSection
If you want to know all the avalaible options of the radeon drivers, here:
http://www.xfree86.org/4.3.0/radeon.4.html
Overall, yes the ATI drivers kick when it comes to performance. Remember that the DRI is in constant developpement, and if you cvs the latest source code, you already will have an improvement over the stock Radeon module of Xfree 4.3.0. Please comment.
)
