Slashdot Mirror


Intel Open Sources Graphics Drivers

PeterBrett writes "Intel's Keith Packard announced earlier today that Intel was open sourcing graphics drivers for their new 965 Express Chipset family graphics controllers. From the announcement: 'Designed to support advanced rendering features in modern graphics APIs, this chipset family includes support for programmable vertex, geometry, and fragment shaders. By open sourcing the drivers for this new technology, Intel enables the open source community to experiment, develop, and contribute to the continuing advancement of open source 3D graphics.' The new drivers, available from the Linux Graphics Drivers from Intel website, are licensed under the GPL for Linux kernel drivers, and MIT license for XOrg 2D & 3D rendering subsystems."

11 of 345 comments (clear)

  1. Competition from AMD/ATI? by thre5her · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Hopefully AMD/ATI will compete by open-sourcing the drivers for their integrated chipsets. Some healthy competition would definitely help the Linux desktop.

    1. Re:Competition from AMD/ATI? by Mr.+Jaggers · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That's a stupid excuse, though. They could always isolate the SGI-laden parts, LGPL the rest, and let the community at least have a fighting chance at replacing what's behind the proprietary API's. I'm not claiming that our homebrew routines would *ever* be better, but I suppose it is within the realm of possibility. Oh, and when I say "always", I do really mean *always*... at any point, even right this minute, they could do so.

      The non-licensed parts of the code don't have to compile to be released. Besides, when bugs are traced back into the dark proprietary code, that would also make ATI the good guys and SGI the bad guys. ATI could claim that the licensed part is really fast and awesome and sweet, but proprietary, and that the community is welcome to try and replace it with something fast and awesome and
      sweet, but open. Or even something slow and crappy, but rock-solid stable, that plays nice with Xorg and the kernel.

      I suppose they might have licensed other companies code and signed away their right to ever release any code they ever write that uses the licensed bits. That would be a collosal blunder, but would partially account for silence on the subject.

      I'm fairly certain that the real reason lies not the code ATI has licensed, but the code/tech they've worked hard on and feel they need to keep secret or else lose their edge against nVidia. Of course, it seems that same statement could be made, swapping the names of the two companies, and still be true. In fact, the "trade secret" and "intellectual property" argument is almost certainly the biggest reason for closed-source driver code. Besides, how can a company who is losing money afford to give anything away for free? At least it always seems like the investors and board of directors of tech companies seem to believe that they are perpetually bleeding cash, even when they file record profits with the SEC.

      Anyway, that's quite enough ranting and unsubstantiated libel for one post.

      --

      When I grow up, I want to have Christopher Walken hair.
    2. Re:Competition from AMD/ATI? by Cyno · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I agree, and most people don't need anything faster than an Intel 955, even the 855 is good enough for 90% of desktop use minus modern 3D gaming. They play quake just fine. What more does one NEED, honestly? ATI and nVidia better wake up or they may soon find a new real competitor on the block.

      I bought Intel graphics with my laptop. At first I wasn't pleased with the performance, but then I got to testing it directly. I can easily get 30 fps in OpenGL for simple geometries. Its really not that bad. They doubled the performance since, and I'm sure their latest stuff is most useable. Can you imagine what they'll come out with next?

      I didn't like Intel, but lately they've been attracting my pocketbook more than any other anti-FOSS businesses. As far as I'm concerned if they aren't pro-FOSS by now, they're anti-FOSS. They know just as well as I do what its all about. Microsoft, no matter how much they say they support it, is obviously fighting it tooth and nail behind closed doors.

  2. first reaction: by mihalis · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Fantastic. Great work Intel. This puts your products in a different, more positive light for me personally. This could be really good for X11. I worked with it for about 10 years and have been very despondent about its chance in a world of proprietary drivers from ATI and NVIDIA being the only way to use modern graphics hardware. Maybe there's a chance for open source desktop after all.

  3. Linux Laptops! by db32 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Ok here is the thing...ATI and nvidia can be a bit of a pain...but on a desktop you buy one or the other and you plug it in and go. Laptops on the other hand your selection is FAR more limited and you have to juggle hardware, and more often than not, something just won't work right or well. This makes the Intel integrated laptops even more attractive now instead of the ATI/nvidia ones. I really hope they go backwards with this to and open their recent chipsets up completely as well.

    --
    The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
  4. Re:Maybe we'll start seeing Intel graphics clones. by Tumbleweed · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'd be willing to bet the REAL reason they don't open their drivers is because they're using stuff they know is the intellectual property of others. Just a guess, though; I have no real information on this, but I'd be very surprised if they can't dig into each other's hardware under a microscope to figure out what the other guy is doing, and reverse engineer each other's drivers. These are some very smart folks we're talking about here.

  5. Kudos to Intel! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This is good news. Open Source won't fix a bad product (hello Netscape), but you can have an army of eager (unpaid!) geeks happily extending your product. The idiocy of companies that hold their driver source proprietary is beyond belief; Does nVidia and ARI really seriously believe it gives them an advantage? Hardly. nVidia's drivers are buggy and crash prone. I am sick of my nVidia card hanging, and the saps at nVidia's support merely send you an automated email "Have you installed the latest driver." Yes, and it also crashes. If I had the source, I could fire up MSDEV. But I don't.

    Intel made an earlier foray into 3D with the i740 which didn't do that well in the marketplace. But now they're back, and this is a nice first step. If they drive nVidia and ATI (and especially nVidia) out of business, I wouldn't shed a tear. Truth is even Microsoft by taking over Shaders with HLSL has done a better job that nVidia with their proprietary Cg language. Open sourcing their drivers shows good faith. Come on Intel!

  6. I think we're missing the point here. by Ruff_ilb · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Many, MANY home users out in the field use on-board video for everything. Now, I'm not saying this'll have them all converting to an Open Source OS, but this is yet another advance that would make sending the average noob user over to Linux without any sort of performance hit.

    Taking a 180 degree turn and looking right back at your interpretation of the story, I find it very likely that Intel will be teaming up with nVidia sometime soon. Now that AMD owns ATI, Intel should be wide open to purchase nVidia if they want, and (although I'm not saying they'll need it), pairing Intel's massive resources with nVidia's enthusiast motherboard chipsets and universal video options, things could improve rapidly for the both of them. However, if Intel is going to enter the market as a third video force, that seems unlikely, although we could see Intel graphics cards interfacing well only with intel boards and intel CPUS, and the customer could likely lose if such a situation becomes possible.

    Anyway, I think I've speculated enough. The bottom line is that open-sourcing these drivers is a very interesting and likely harmless move for intel to make, and it should make the jobs of many OS coders easier in the open source OS circles.

    --
    http://www.TheGamerNation.com/Forums
    1. Re:I think we're missing the point here. by Ruff_ilb · · Score: 3, Interesting

      INTEL
      Type: Public (NASDAQ: INTC)
      Founded: 1968
      Location: Santa Clara, California, USA (incorporated in Delaware)
      Key people Paul Otellini, CEO
      Craig Barrett, Chairman
      Industry Semiconductors
      Products Microprocessors
      Flash memory
      Revenue $38.83 billion USD (2005)
      Operating income $12.1 billion USD (2005)
      Net income $8.7 billion USD (2005)

      NVIDIA
      Type: Public (NASDAQ: NVDA)
      Founded: 1993
      Location: Santa Clara, California, USA
      Key people Jen-Hsun Huang, CEO
      Industry Semiconductors- Specialized
      Products Graphics processing units
      Motherboard chipsets
      Revenue $2.375 Billion USD (2005)
      Net income $302.5 Million USD (2005)
      Employees 2,737 (2005)
      Website www.nvidia.com

      Check out those rows, especially Revenue and Net income. Intel is a MUCH larger company.

      Compare to

      AMD
      Type: Public (NYSE: AMD)
      Founded: 1969
      Location: Sunnyvale, California, USA
      Industry Semiconductors
      Products Microprocessors
      Revenue $5.848 billion USD (2005)
      Net income $165.483 million USD (2005)
      Employees 18,100 (Nov 2005)
      Website www.amd.com

      ATI
      Type: Public (NASDAQ: ATYT)
      Founded: 1985
      Location: Markham, Ontario, Canada
      Key people David E. Orton, CEO
      Industry Semiconductors
      Products Graphics cards
      Graphics processing units
      Motherboard chipsets
      Video capture cards
      Revenue $2.222 Billion USD (2005)
      Net income $41.676 Million USD (2005)
      Employees 3,469 (2005)

      Ati, suprisingly enough, has MORE employees than nVidia, an essentially equivalent revenue, and a higher next income.

      If AMD can buy ATI, Intel should be able to buy nVidia with little problem.

      --
      http://www.TheGamerNation.com/Forums
  7. Talking out of both sides of my face, by MrCopilot · · Score: 3, Interesting
    First, Brilliant move. They know, they just know AMD is going to blow open wide the company formerly known as Ati's drivers. They drop this announcement before the paperwork is even dry on the AMD/Ati deal. Bravo, kudos, well played... etc.

    Second, Thank You Intel, so very much.... BECAUSE Even the laziest of our part-time hobbyist programmers will be able to improve your driver performance.
    All these years I just refused to believe Intel could develop and ship newer and newer Card/integrated Video chips that were lightyears behind in performance and features. I instead chose to think of them as a Hardware Company full of Hardware Engineers who look down on the few "soft ones". I can understand how that might develop there.

    I believed, some day, they would come around, and hire some PC Software/Driver Engineers. Someday the driver would rescue their possibly brilliant designs.

    Well this is even better. We get our open graphics card with every e-machine.

    Except, Of course Intel doesn't pay for it and yet reaps the rewards, and naturally perpetuates the undervalued view of us software guys.

    Vicous cycle.

    /rant heh, And then there were 2.

    --
    OSGGFG - Open Source Gamers Guide to Free Games
  8. Re:Talking out of both sides of my face, by ewhac · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Second, Thank You Intel, so very much.... BECAUSE Even the laziest of our part-time hobbyist programmers will be able to improve your driver performance.

    Erm... I doubt it.

    For the past few years, off and on, I've been porting the XFree/Xorg Intel 8xx graphics drivers to BeOS, so I have a fairly close relationship with that code, and unusually detailed knowledge of the chip series. Unless this represents a completely different codebase (which I doubt), it's really not that bad. Unless you're planning on turning it into a full kernel-mode driver, taking advantage of native interrupts and so forth, there's not a lot that could be improved.

    The most annoying part with this driver release is that it still needs the BIOS to set display modes. BeOS can't access/execute the BIOS, so the driver has to be full native. I'll probably still have to do some fairly icky things to make it work...

    Schwab