Slashdot Mirror
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."
Really, it's not that I like nvidia. But I've been hearing reports on /. since the beginning of the year of ATI linux drivers coming soon. How about we wait until they're actually release before bothering to give them any support.
Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
Here, you dropped your tinfoil hat.
They're useless to me unless the source is available, preferably under the GPL. I really wish they'd work -inside- the framework of the kernel, Mesa, and xorg projects instead of building one-off binary drivers. What if I want to use their card on PowerPC, want to link against the latest (or a non-mainline) kernel, or just want to run an all-open system?
"Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails
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.
Please try and support The Open Graphics Project.= AboutOpenGraphics
http://wiki.opengraphics.org./tiki-index.php?page
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
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.
The title is misleading - AMD did not launch anything, they announced it. Just the fact that some random hardware site got a sneak peek at the driver does not change anything...
I didn't see any word about MPEG2/MPEG4 offloading, or even word of proper Xv support/controls. I've got my fingers crossed, but for those of us who live & breathe MythTV, I fear it's still a one-horse town.
I keep trying to pick fights, but I can't shake this Excellent karma.
Unless they fired everyone responsible for writing the drivers and the entire QA department, then that still makes this one in a row. Even if AMD holds them to a higher standard, it'll take at least one more good driver to convince anyone of it. Like I said, ATI has had working drivers once or twice before.
Besides, people have a long memory when it comes to garbage hardware. A $40 game that blows can be a fluke. A $200 (or more) video card that only does 640x480 in 16 colors is harder to forget.
Once a company burns you on hardware, there's no reason to ever have to go back to them if there is any competition at all. Look at the other options you have for graphics. Hell, people are even using built-in video instead of ATI. How bad do you have to be for people to prefer onboard video?
Intel graphics are also shit compared to Nvidia or ATI.
Also, I don't think your number "prove" most linux installs are desktops. Many probably still are just servers.
I don't think he dropped it. I don't think he trusts the tinfoil manufactures not to collude with the government and put small holes in their foil to permit the government's rays through. He's going to beat them through shear force of will by not thinking anymore.
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.
I agree, but for some reason you've ruled out Nvidia. Great drivers and a fast card. ATI is the only company that thinks its ok to put out shitty graphics drivers.
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.
I know what the "proof" will be; or at least, the start of a trend.
Full AIGLX support in 8.42 (the article is discussing 8.41). The claim at Phoronix is that AMD has claimed AIGLX is going in at 8.42.
Continuing the trend would be MPEG-4/H.264 Xvideo support in 8.4x or 8.5x, preferably within the next 6 months or so (keep in mind that the Radeon 2X00 series have excellent video capabilities).
If they hit those two goals, I'll most likely purchase 2-3 ATI cards for my Linux boxes; the AIGLX and Xvideo things are a big deal to me, and Nvidia cards don't currently accelerate MPEG-4/H.264.
WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
I'd say Intel is worse shit than even ATI (which I detest). Out of the two Intel systems at work, neither will work outside of frame buffer mode, and worse than that, they cannot run at the native resolution of the LCD monitor.
The nVidia drivers just plain work. They detected the monitor correctly and have worked flawlessly ever since. Open or close source, they are by far the best drivers I've used. The ATI drivers I use on one of the machines support the monitors, but introduce periodic 2-D corruption when running Xemacs and corrupt the cursor when moving between Xinerama panes, but at least they can do 1680x1050 and Xinerama. I don't even mind that the 3-D is slow since this is a work machine and I don't really need 3-D.
The Intel drivers are far too slow at 2-D, and given I can only do 1280x1024 or 1600x1200 and both look like crap on the LCD monitors. One machine is a P-4 and the other a core 2 duo machine, and both are unusable with Intel.
I only want 2-D and the Intel drivers can't even do that right.
Also with nVidia, I don't really even need to care which chipset is used as long as it isn't too old, since the drivers just work. Even the open source nVidia drivers work well for 2-D.
This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
So... I don't even bother trying the fglrx drivers since the reverse engineered free driver is more stable, and actually works. I mean seriously ATI, a non-profit project which bases its code on guessing how your hardware works has not only better, but in some cases superior, stability than your shitty driver, that really says something. I think it is time for a bad car analogy. Imagine a driver who memorises the layout of the town by carefully noting down where his car crashes as he drives. This guy's taxi company is currently beating your top of the line staff, even thou you have a full map of the town, a military grade GPS receiver, and real-time information about traffic congestion. Oh, and btw, your competitor's car has opaque windows, can only use the reverse gear and he is only able to turn left. Even so, the customers prefer him in front of you. In short: You suck! Big time...
And that's a shame, because people probably really ought to keep their hats on.
"Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
Accidental security hole, deliberate rootkit, what's the difference, right?
Oh, wait, I forgot: fuck Heinlein's Razor; every mistake is deliberate! nVidia is consipiring with Microsoft and Halliburton to take control of your computer and obfuscate the true nature of The Milkman. It's all clear to me now!
I've upped my standards, so up yours.
> 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.
> He's going to beat them through shear force of will by not thinking anymore.
Well, he sure came to the right place!
Another interesting thing about the Intel driver is that due to being pretty much the most capable open-source driver around, it gets a lot of attention from XOrg way, including being compatible with the latest nifty standards. If I want TV-out on ATI, I have to use a driver that's been in continuous beta for the past four years and reboot the machine with the TV plugged in so the card notices it. If I want TV-out on NVidia I have to put weird crap in my X config file and then run nvidia's custom settings app to configure displays. Okay, better. If I want TV-out on Intel I use xrandr -- from the commandline or from any of the GUI utilities already out there... and it works. Bang. Just like that.