Slashdot Mirror


Problems With OEM ATI Cards And ATI's Linux Driver

Doug Bostrom writes "Over at FlightGear.org, Andy Ross describes how ATI's new Linux drivers only seem to work with "official" ATI cards (made by ATI), why that does not make sense, and a possible fix that unfortunately would mean booting Windows, if only for a few minutes."

19 of 248 comments (clear)

  1. Summary is wrong by awptic · · Score: 5, Informative

    According to the message posted, the utility used to reflash the BIOS runs in DOS, not Windows, and will work in FreeDOS

  2. Re:Luckily... by packeteer · · Score: 4, Informative

    Nvidia drivers for linux are really good but So are Matrox's. Matrox write some bitchen drivers like Nvidia but unlike Nvidia they GPL the whole thing. Getting all the windows functionality in linux for both my GF4 and G400 cards is perfectly easy. I advise buying from those two companies for linux. Matrox cards though old are very nice because they are cheap and they have good linux duel head support.

    --
    unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
  3. Re:Not everyone has *dual boot by Niadh · · Score: 5, Informative

    RTA -F(polite)

    He didn't have windows/dos/fat partitions at all. he downloaded freedos and used a ramdrive to flash his videocard's bios. thats all that was wrong. the ATI driver checks to make sure the videocard is an ATI card. It should just check for an ATI chipset. Sounds like a problem ATI will pacth in the next release.

  4. Re:Luckily... by Squarewav · · Score: 2, Informative

    the new nvidia drivers (40.72)for winXP are total crap, 9/10 times it will lock the system up when starting games, at least on my system,(pent4 2Ghz, Ti 4200) I'v had to install much older 30.82 drivers to play games

  5. Re:Official ATI cards? by lendude · · Score: 2, Informative

    There are two 'types' of ATI cards (at least for the 97xx series) - cards made by ATI itself which are stickered as 'made by ATI', and cards made by other manufacturers which may be using the exact ATI reference card design or the manufacturer's permutation thereof, and with enhanced features and which are stickered as 'powered by ATI'.

    --
    "Get off the cross - we need the wood" - Tori Amos
  6. Re:Why not patch the drivers instead? by ActiveSX · · Score: 4, Informative
  7. Re:I've been hearing about bad ATI drivers... by YahoKa · · Score: 2, Informative

    ATI has really cleaned up lately. It seems that they realized their driver crapiness problems and began to fix things up. They are now approaching being as good as Nvidia drivers. I have no problems under windows or linux with the ATI drivers. I'm into 3D and games though ... and i don't use matrox at all. So i guess it's whatever floats your boat.

  8. Re:Why not patch the drivers instead? by benwb · · Score: 3, Informative

    Yes, you were mistaken. ATI's drivers are not open source. The GATOS project is open source and provides drivers for ATI's cards, but is not affiliated with ATI.

  9. Re:Advice please help by Tomble · · Score: 5, Informative
    Anonymous coward asked:
    Which card will work hardware accelerated out of the box on latest Mandrake or Redhat?
    Er, well AFAICT, you can't get hardware 3d acceleration on Linux without at least configuring it a little bit, but if you mean "What cards won't I need to download extra drivers for to get hardware accelearated 3d", then the answer would be roughly MGA G400, maybe G200, Radeon models up to 7500 (I think) as these are done by the free DRI drivers, and most of the more recent 3dfx based cards.

    Presuming you already have Linux installed, you should look in the various /usr/doc/whatever directories belonging to the XFree86 stuff (there will probably be a whole load of different packages required for X, I don't know about Redhat/Mandrake as I use Debian) and look for a file like README.DRI, which might be gzipped (it is for me). The file also tells you how to make sure that X will try to use OpenGL (not difficult, may already be done for you!)

    Alternatively, the actual DRI webpages are more up to date, and more thorough about which versions of cards they support - look for the "status" page for a start!

    Configuring stuff, heh, I forget! If you have X set up to use your card, and tell it to use OpenGL, it will know whether your card can do it or not, and will try to load the appropriate kernel module. In my case, using a G400 card, it doesn't manage this, as it wants to have the agpgart module installed before the mga module, but doesn't realise to do this, so when my machine's booted, I normally modprobe the agpgart module myself, and then the mga module, and then the OpenGL works fine. Really, I should set up the modules.conf files to do this automatically, but I can't be bothered.

    Bear in mind, that the mga module is only right for using G400/G200 cards, and the other cards would want other kernel modules! Also, those other kernel modules might not have those same requirements. In short, your mileage may vary.

    But to return to the point in hand: If you don't want to be downloading binary-only drivers, then nVidia based cards are NOT what you want; they have no opensource 3d drivers at all that I know of. Some of the ATi cards are supported out of the box (I don't know how well!!) and some are only supported by ATi's driver so far, the one in the article.

    --
    Be careful! New moon tonight.
  10. Built by ATI vs Powered by ATI by Lhadatt · · Score: 3, Informative

    There is a difference between "Built by ATI" and "Powered by ATI". The problem you're seeing with OEM and non-ATI manufactured cards (aka "Powered by ATI") is in the BIOS -- the driver expects an official ATI BIOS (which would be a on "Built by ATI" card) and doesn't see it, so it won't work. The "Powered by" cards use reference drivers which aren't tweaked to any particular iteration of the card. "Built by" drivers won't install on non-ATI cards.

    Solutions: Flash the BIOS as some have been suggesting, or buy an official card. Or just yell at ATI enough until they release a reference driver.

    --
    -----------
    POiT!
  11. Re:Luckily... by Blkdeath · · Score: 3, Informative
    You have _GOT_ to be kidding...... First off nVidia is Microsoft's bitch, they dont do SHIT from within Linux,
    Incidentally, this video depicts a somewhat different story.
    --
    BD Phone Home!

    Shameless plug. Like you weren't expecting it.

  12. Re:This isn't just Linux! by GarfBond · · Score: 2, Informative
    It's possible the original drivers are buggy. It certainly isn't *impossible* (and it won't be impossible for NV either, you might note. GFFX is not a rehashed GF3 core like the GF4 was, and it is likely that NV will run into the occasional driver hiccup with their new series as well). FWIW, the 9700pro driver launch has been ATI's smoothest to date.

    In any case, in Windows at least, you could benefit from downloading the latest drivers. Of all the things I own, video cards is the one category where upgrading the drivers can improve things...a lot.

    While ATI has been known to have shitty drivers in the past (r128, R100, and early R200 days mostly), they have been working hard to fix this problem. The latest driver set is CATALYST 02.4 (win2k and xp win9x required control panel). ATI's even gone as far as producing a PDF that describes exactly what was fixed in the release.

    1st Party support for linux drivers have been new to them (this is only their first official release) so give them some time before they mature.

  13. Re:Luckily... by Cryptnotic · · Score: 3, Informative

    I don't know how much Matrox helped with getting the Linux/XFree86/GDI drivers written. I'm fairly sure it was mostly thanks to hackers who reverse engineered the Windows drivers.

    --
    My other first post is car post.
  14. OEM's not happy by jonsmirl · · Score: 5, Informative

    I've been in touch with tech support at the OEM for my Radeon 9000 Pro, Power Color. They are not happy with the situation and the pressure is on for ATI to get a fix out ASAP. Latest email estimated sometime next week for drivers that work on all of the OEM cards.

    I also get the impression that this was not a conspiracy. The drivers use the INT10 support in the card's video BIOS. The OEM video BIOS's vary slightly from card to card depending on what features they implemented (2 DAC vs 1, etc). The driver needs to be adjusted for each of the various BIOS. That's why flashing the ATI BIOS works. ATI just made it work on their cards first and will be filling in support for OEM cards ASAP.

  15. Re:Advice please help by Eivind · · Score: 2, Informative
    Er, well AFAICT, you can't get hardware 3d acceleration on Linux without at least configuring it a little bit,

    Nonsense. You must be using Debian, or some other distro from the stoneage. When installing Mandrake (and presumably RedHat and SuSE) you are presented with a list of X-servers compatible to your card (the card is autodetected) and simply allowed to pick which option you want.

    For me, with my Matrox G550 these options included XFree-3.3.6 with or without hardware 3D-acceleration, and XFree-4.2.1 again with or without 3D-acceleration. (why anyone would explicitly select "without" I don't know)

    This has been the state of affairs atleast since Mandrake 8.0 released a year and a half ago.

  16. Another workaround (without Windows) by Lev_Arris · · Score: 4, Informative

    Here's a thread where people asked the same question on running 'powered by' cards and it contains a link that we found which seems to solve the problem. (Requires hex editing a file and the 'powered by' restriction is gone)

    http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthread.php?s=&th re adid=33648944&perpage=20&pagenumber=4

  17. How to get the ATi drivers working with ANY card. by Wiz · · Score: 5, Informative

    I've got a OEM 9000 PRO from ATi and it refused to work initially:

    (--) fglrx(0): Chipset: "Radeon RV250 If" (Chipset = 0x4966)
    (--) fglrx(0): (PciSubVendor = 0x148c, PciSubDevice = 0x2039)
    (--) fglrx(0): board vendor info: third party grafics adapter - NOT original ATI
    (--) fglrx(0): Linear framebuffer (phys) at 0xd8000000
    (--) fglrx(0): MMIO registers at 0xe9000000
    (--) fglrx(0): ChipRevID = 0x00
    (--) fglrx(0): VideoRAM: 131072 kByte (64-bit DDR SDRAM)
    (EE) fglrx(0): board/chipset is not supported by this driver (third party board)

    I quickly came to the conclusion that the ATi drivers don't like non-ATi cards. I did a bit of searching and I found a solution - I did not find this myself!

    Install and configure the drivers as per normal. Also, I suggest you download "hexedit" from freshmeat.net as you'll need it. You'll then need to hexedit this file: /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/drivers/fglrx_drv.o

    To let it accept non-ATi boards, hexedit the file at offset 0x626e and alter "74 44" to "90 90" and save changes and away you go. Since making this change only, my 9000 PRO now works fine under RH 8.

    This means no Vesa drivers! It means no more 60Hz screen refreshes! It means for GL acceleration. Run "glxinfo" for some information on the status of OpenGL and maybe "glx_gears" to actually test it. It should run very quickly.

    Enjoy!

  18. Do they work anyway? by HeX86 · · Score: 2, Informative

    I got a boxed ati radeon 8500, and the drivers don't work anyway for me. The DRI module won't load into the kernel, nor will it recompile.

    The xfree86 firegl side drivers leave the console looking like it went through a potato masher.

    It's really sad that I bought an ATI card specifically because I knew ATI had open source drivers for their Radeon cards. Well, I waited over a year for drivers for the 8500 that don't work...

    Wow, what loyalty to the linux community.

    Closed source drivers maybe just PR, but at least nVidia has a reason why their closed source (The SGI contract or whatever). AFAIK (and corect me if I'm wrong) ATI has no real reason for closed source drivers.

  19. Fixed by ATI in release 2.5.1 by andyross · · Score: 2, Informative
    For the record, I'm the author (but not the submitter!) of the original report. It was really just intended for the FlightGear folks who might be interested in the story. I didn't mean to be the poster child for ATI compatibility problems, nor the last word on their solutions. Regardless, I just received the following from ATI. The slashdot posting seems to have had the appropriate effect. I haven't had a chance to insall the new driver version for myself yet; perhaps others can comment. Certainly ATI needs to be commended on their fast turnaround.
    Please use the following communication as you desire!

    Hi there,

    Last week we posted a set of unified Linux drivers. These drivers were only loading up on "Built by ATI" cards. Through our various feedback mechanisms we have determined that there is a large community of "Powered by ATI" Linux users that did not benefit from our Linux drivers. At this point we are happy to announce an update to our Linux driver (ver. 2.5.1) which will work on both "Powered by" and "Built by". ATI's driver and software strategy is firmly based on responsiveness and we greatly appreciate the feedback our Linux users have provided. Please use http://apps.ati.com/linuxDfeedback/ for a direct feedback line to ATI.

    Thanks again for the feedback,

    Terry Makedon
    Sr. Product Manager - Software
    ATI Technologies