AMD Launches New ATI Linux Driver
Michael Larabel writes "AMD has issued a press release announcing 'significant graphics performance and compatibility enhancements' on Linux. AMD will be delivering new ATI Linux drivers this year that offer ATI Radeon HD 2000 series support, AIGLX support (Beryl and Compiz), and major performance improvements. At Phoronix we have been testing these new drivers internally for the past few weeks and have a number of articles looking at this new driver. The ATI 8.41 Linux driver delivers Linux gaming improvements from the R300/400 series and the R500 series. The inaugural Radeon HD 2900XT series support also can be found in the new ATI Linux driver with 'the best price/performance ratio of any high-end graphics card under Linux.' While this new driver cannot be downloaded yet, in their press release AMD also alludes to accelerating efforts with the open-source community."
I purchase Nvidia only because the cards actually work under linux, or they used to. Lately there are issues...
If AMD steps up to the plate and gives us good drivers and actually listens and reacts fast to reported problems, they can come out way ahead.
Nvidia driver install used to be painless, now it can be incredibly painful depending on the Distro and Card you have. I still cant get a old Geforce4 card working on my wifes ubuntu PC. I gave up and switched to the intel onboard chipset. Far better support for that video chipset than nvidia is giving us even for the older cards that USED to work great.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
It's only been 3-4 years since I bought an ATI card in the (vain) hopes that they would continue supporting X devs. Sadly, I found poor support and lots of bugs. Unless they pull an Intel and release/fund Free drivers for their graphics chips, for me it's Intel for ease-of-use and NVidia for performance. I've lost faith in them.
--
Given enough personal experience, all stereotypes are shallow.
In previous discussions about ATI and their Linux driver support, I had mentioned that I made the bold move to move away from ATI on my laptop to nVidia. (Dell makes these kinds of changes fairly easy) My laptop is an Inspiron 8600 which I had originally ordered to use the ATI Mobility 9600 card. Through eBay, I ordered and later installed the 128MB version of the nVidia card to replace it. (Not terribly expensive either.) I just checked AMD/ATI's web site to see what the current hardware supported under the current driver is. Sure enough, my mobility 9600 is now at the very bottom of the supported hardware list and with the new release, it is certain to fall off entirely.
If it hasn't been stated clearly enough in the past, I'll state it again. Even if you don't care about whether a driver is OSS or proprietary from a technical standpoint, users are advised to understand that proprietary drivers places control over your hardware's obsolescence firmly in the hands of the manufacturer. And these days, with limited hardware selection for things like laptops or very tiny PCs, your options are pretty limited. These proprietary drivers are damaging the viability of Linux on older hardware which has been one of Linux's strongest motivators for adoption.
Moving to nVidia helps because at least with nVidia, they have a legacy hardware program to support and update drivers for older hardware. AMD/ATI does not. Ultimately, though, I should probably settle in and get comfortable with the OSS drivers for my hardware even if the performance is lower... it's a damned shame though.
Exactly. I got a laptop with an Intel GMA. Not a powerful video chip, but it has enough power to do all that 3D desktop stuff. And there was no fuss getting drivers. No extra stuff to download. No configuration to do. Everything just worked. For all my new computers (for the foreseeable future, until other graphics cards manufacturers release good open source drivers), they will all be using Intel GMA, because these video chips are good enough for my uses, and the drivers are extremely solid. If I want to play video games, I'll use my console (Wii).
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Yes they are. But once you bring driver quality and stability into the equation, then Intel wins hands down. I'd rather have a slower video card that actually works, than a fast one that doesn't. Also, unless you are playing games, you won't notice the speed difference. Even if you're running a 3D desktop.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
What the hell is up with all the scathing remarks?! Let's remember that the ATI acquisition by AMD is new and let's be impressed, considering past support, that progress is being made in the Linux ATI drivers arena AT ALL! I really do believe that AMD is going to do the right thing by Linux. They're two underdogs that stand a lot to gain from each other and it would only stand to hurt any gains to be had by such a relationship by continuing what ATI was doing before the buyout. The fact of the matter is, ATI has undoubtedly undergone a mass re-organization and is, doubtlessly, also operating under a new philosophy. Anyone who knows someone who had their division bought out knows this to be true. Let's just sit back and see what happens before we start (effectively) blaming AMD for ATI's past mistakes and poorly written code.
It was announced today at the Linux summit they will open up specifications for all graphics cards, and release a 'reference'/minimal open-source driver for all cards.
More here: http://lwn.net/Articles/248227
xer.xes -- 4181
Since the beginning of the year? Hell, I've been hearing murmuring for years on "support for XYZ will be coming soon!" - and yet today the disparity between the ATI/nVidia feature set and stability under Linux are still huge. How long since nVidia got support for AIGLX? ATI only just adds it now?
You'll also note that, GeForce 8x00 series notwithstanding (which are marginally slower under Linux), nVidia maintain a very small performance delta between the Linux and windows version of their drivers. ATI's performance delta can sometimes be as much as 50% (top-of-my-head BTW, Phoronix had another full-of-crappy-graphs article about it a while back).
I'm hoping AMD can pull some weight and at least get better support for laptop chipsets and IGP's in their otherwise pretty nice chipsets. Until then, I have to stick to Intel or nVidia for graphics, and since I only need the one gaming box, I'm getting through alot of Intel motherboards. Guess what CPU goes in an Intel motherboard, AMD? Despite me wanting to use X2's for their lower idle power envelope, I find it hard to justify.
Sigh.
Moderation Total: -1 Troll, +3 Goat
"I'd rather have a slower video card that actually works, than a fast one that doesn't"
That's why nearly all Linux gamers and more than 60% of Windows gamers buy Nvidia cards. They've had better drivers for ages. Not open source, which disturbs some of the hardcore, but great drivers nonetheless.
What about people like me that use Solaris? or any othe esoteric operating system other than the big-3 ?
or if there's strange bugs that you think are the drivers fault, and you happen to know enough C to fix them right now instead of whenever the snail-slow vendor gets around to it?
as for your comment about giving away what you do for a living... AMD doesn't write drivers for money, they make hardware. Intel manages to make hardware and open-source a good majority of their drivers, so that's just a stupid argument.
Amen. Same for AMD in general. Come on... actually release -SOMETHING-!
"If anything can go wrong, it will." - Murphy
And that's a shame, because people probably really ought to keep their hats on.
"Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
if they documented the interface, they wouldn't have to support it. someone else would do the work.
> Is there a particular reason you need the driver to be open-source?
So it works when the kernel changes their *&^!%@! ABI yet again in the latest patchlevel. To port it to other OS's. So smarter people than me can look at it and find bugs or interoperability problems with it and send vendor updates to it.
I can understand their reasoning -- video cards are more or less big FPU arrays these days, and the actual 3d graphics is all software, so they might not want to expose their secrets. The other problem is that the competition would use it to find potential patent infringement. It's a Nash equilibrium: the first one to open-source loses. If I were to put the number generously at 50,000 extra customers due to OSS, that simply wouldn't cover the potential loss. But the fact is, there aren't any solid numbers as to what the market effect would be, and uncertainty is in a lot of ways worse than outright losing -- at least you can write off the latter on your balance sheet early.
Done with slashdot, done with nerds, getting a life.