[Bug 94842] Ditching xf86-video-ati in favor of xf86-video-modesetting?

[bugzilla-daemon at freedesktop.org]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=94842

--- Comment #4 from Hi-Angel <Hi-Angel at yandex.ru> ---
(In reply to N. W. from comment #0)
> Hello,
> 
> according to the discussion in the following Phoronix forum thread:
> 
> https://www.phoronix.com/forums/forum/phoronix/latest-phoronix-articles/
> 863332-intel-s-unreleased-3-0-x-org-driver-gets-more-fixes-for-dri3-present
> 
> the generic xf86-video-modesetting DDX driver included in xorg-server seems
> to be better than most vendor specific xf86-video- drivers.

Problems mentioned there are specifically about xf86-video-intel. Although I do
agree — it'd be cool if everyone contributed to a single driver.

> I am wondering:
> 
> Then why not ditch xf86-video-ati in favor of xf86-video-modesetting?
> 
> Regards

I was just wondering alike, but about my local PC. So, just FTR, if anyone
would query the internet for the same question: upon research I didn't find
much difference between -ati and -modesetting. From the latest benchmarks I
found (April 2016) they seem to have comparable performance. Then I looked an
activity of both drivers, and found that -modesetting¹ has latest commit 3(!)
years ago, whilst -ati² just 4 days ago. So, for end-users: unless you see
problems, it's better to stick with -ati.

1: https://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/driver/xf86-video-modesetting/log/
2: https://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/driver/xf86-video-ati/log/

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-driver-ati/attachments/20170211/52beb6e4/attachment.html>