Future AMD GPUs To Be More 'Open-Source Friendly'

skaroo writes "Phoronix is reporting that future AMD GPUs will be more open-source friendly. After AMD started releasing their GPG specifications to the open-source community, questions arose whether there would be information covering the Unified Video Decoder (UVD) found on the Radeon HD 2000 graphics cards. The UVD information is needed in order for hardware-accelerated video playback, but it likely cannot be opened due to DRM. However, an AMD representative said that moving to a modular UVD design is a requirement for future GPUs and that they will be more open-source friendly. They will also be opening the video acceleration information for their earlier graphics cards."

Comments

I remember a time...

[mangu]

...when chip manufacturers gave away the full specifications. I even received by snail-mail thick books, 500 pages or so, with the specs from companies like Texas instruments and Motorola. Some manufacturers even sent free samples of the chips themselves.

Where have they gone wrong?

Re:I remember a time...

[Travoltus]

The big picture is that runaway Capitalism is where they have gone wrong.

Consumer freedom is now irrelevant. What good is the free market when you can't buy what you want - namely, to keep this on topic, where can we get a powerful video card with the full specs for making open source drivers? Good luck building your own fab. Apparently only a trillionaire can afford such simple freedoms.

This is clearly an example where capitalism fails miserably.

(Uh oh, here come the angry "Capitalism is God, how dare you infidels question the market!" right wing Republo-jihadists with mod points...)

Re:I remember a time...

[sqrt(2)]

I don't have mod points but I'll agree with you here. With one caveat. The "free market" (can't exist btw, it's just a idealized concept) IS working how it's supposed to. There isn't really a demand for an open platform GPU and thus the market doesn't provide one. If there were enough people wanting one that a company could make money selling them then you could buy it. Capitalism does tend to screw the little guys who have niche or obscure needs, unless you can pay to get things custom designed and produced.

But it looks like AMD is finally going to start servicing that section of the market, I'm still skeptical but we'll see how things turn out.

Re:I remember a time...

[Marcion]

I think the problem is not too much capitalism, it is too little. Adam Smith's free markets have been replaced by an international neo-conservative monarchy and nobility.

Among certain industries, free markets have been replaced by cartels. These cartels then send out waves of lobbyists and campaign contributions to get governments to further weight the system against the consumer.

If you look at how the airplane developed, the market was hampered by cartels, patents and so on. However, in the two world wars, the war effort was considered more important than entrenched interests within the early aviation industry. All these cartels and patents were swept aside in favour of truly free markers, and they could finally build decent planes, and build them in quantity.

Society is slowly but surely going to realise that computers are more important for the development of the economy and society as a whole than for the narrow interests of the technology industry, and then radically free markets will be introduced once again.

Look at the Microsoft vs EU decision and the OLPC project, both of these in their different ways are interesting early signs.

Re:I remember a time...

[Marcion]

Markets start free, they just become non-free through layers of government intervention and large firms colluding. Certain agricultural products are more or less free markets, as well as light bulbs, screws, etc.

The resistances in the system are not physical properties of nature but man made structures. The problems are never that the speed of light is too slow or gravity is too strong. The problem is that those who think they are against government intervention, often are the first to argue for patents, trademarks, trade barriers, special protections, and so on.

Free markets are the optimal solution for the majority of the population, both as consumers and employees. Cartels only benefit the minority.

If governments became truly accountable to voters, such that the voters could clearly get actual representatives, rather than a choice of two identical people who will ignore the voters for the next four-five years, then I don't see why the interference cannot be removed in most industries if the will was there.

Re:I remember a time...

[MMC Monster]

Capitalism is working, only slowly. Open APIs and open source drivers weren't a selling point, so they weren't available. Now with the slowly rising popularity of Linux, and the realization that Linux users are generally more influential in the purchase of hardware than the average buyer, the APIs and drivers will open up.

It's important that we, as a community, reward the good guys (with more purchases) and to let the sales people know why we choose them over their competitors.

That being said, I'm a little ambivalent about the whole AMD/ATI video mess. They've been talking this up for the last year, but have the 3d specs for the hardware been released? Is there a stable opensource driver for Linux even close to the performance of the WinXP/Vista drivers (I don't know).

Re:I remember a time...

[RAMMS EIN]

I agree with the general message of your post, but I have to nitpick.

``As demand grows, you'll see more vendors opening up specs. It's their right to do so or not, and your right to vote with your wallet.''

Your right to vote with your wallet is only useful if you _can_ vote with your wallet. If nobody will sell you hardware with available specs for a price that you can afford, what will you do?

``The only place OSS is making a dent is server space. Why do you need an advanced GPU on your server?''

A number of points can be made here. First of all, open source is making inroads in other places than server space, too. I don't have exact figures (nobody does), but I see KDE, GNOME, and fvwm desktops often enough. Wal-Mart and Dell are selling PCs with Linux pre-installed. Many routers and like devices use Linux and Busybox. All development work I've been involved in used open source, usually exclusively or almost exclusively. Open source web browsers hold a sizable chunk of the market.

Another point is that there is a bit of a chicken and egg problem. It doesn't make a lot of sense to open specs for the hardware if this will only benefit you a little. So you don't do that if only few people are asking. It doesn't help a lot to ask for specs if you aren't going to get them anyway. So few people ask. There also isn't a lot of software in th open source world that would see a great benefit from working 3D. And it doesn't make a lot of sense to start developing that software if 3D doesn't work anyway.

This is the pit the world's been in, but it's slowly changing. Nvidia has made available good 3D drivers, allowing 3D software to be developed. Now there are Neverwinter Nights, Compiz, Blender, etc. Apparently, Intel has seen value in supporting open source, and there are good open source drivers for Intel graphics cards. And the number of people using open source software appears to be growing. Certainly, awareness of open source is greater than it was, say, 10 years ago. Day by day, the landscape is changing.

Re:I remember a time...

[AncientPC]

From the Read More section: AMD Release 900+ pages of GPU Specs.

There is a fairly stable closed source ATI driver from the AMD website that supports AIGLX (required for Compiz).

As for ATI open source drivers refer to this list. Copy and pasted for convenience:

Unsupported
X1300 / R515 based cards.
X1600 / R530 based cards.
X1800 / R520 based cards.
X1900 / R580 based cards.

2D acceleration only
Xpress 200M Northbridge integrated GPUs

Good 3D acceleration support
9500 / R300 based cards.
9600 / rv350 or rv360 based cards.
9700 / R300 based cards.
9800 / R350 or R360 based cards.
X300 / rv370 based cards.
X600 / rv380 based cards.
X700 / rv410 based cards.
X800 / R420 or R423 or R430 or R480 based cards.
X850 / R480 or R481 based cards.
X1050 / rv370 based cards.

Full 3D acceleration support
7000 / rv100 based cards.
7200 / R100 based cards.
7500 / rv200 based cards.
8X00 / R200 based cards.
9000 / rv250 based cards.
9100 / R200 based cards.
9200 / rv280 based cards.

Re:I remember a time...

[A nonymous Coward]

I suppose you mean in theory as opposed to practice, just as many remarks on capitalism are confused between theory and practice. However, since all modern and historical governments which have called themselves communists did have central planning, I stand by my definition.

Reminds me of friends who brag about being communists, "but not Stalinists".

Re:I remember a time...

[Anonymous Coward]

What I'm saying is, if you list socialism and communism, you can't ignore what separates them. Otherwise, what's the point of listing both? Socialism and communism aren't synonymous political and economical systems just because people call socialist states "communist" to lure or scare others. If you had just written "communism, like fascism, is based on the idea that central planning works," I would have simply ascribed that to the usual imprecise use of the word communism. By listing both, you insinuate that there is a difference, but then proceed to make a conclusion which negates that very difference.

The topic is difficult enough without thoughtlessly mixing up the vocabulary. As long as people think of the failed and failing socialist states when they talk about communism, they can't really discuss what communism was meant to overcome and what the problems with that are. Everybody likes freedom, right? So we hate commies, right? Well, the people who like the promise of communism are not thinking of it that way. To them communism is the very promise of freedom which they don't have in feudal, capitalist and socialist societies. They think of socialism as a necessary step (put the means of production into the hands of the people) towards communism, which then frees them of the central authority. If you mix up the two, you rob yourself of the chance to discuss the problems which are inherent and unique to the communist model. Without removing the misattributed overshadowing central authority from the model, you can't discuss the motivations and hopes which are nourished by the communist model, and if you can't discuss them, you can't disprove them.

Your friends who are "communists but not stalinists" are entertaining these hopes. If you want to talk about these hopes, know that your friends are not trying to establish another central authority regime. They are not just aiming for "good central authority." You have a much better chance if you start from there and let them try and explain to you how that's supposed to work.

Don't buy AMD.

[ni1s]

DRM "functionality" in hardware? No thanks.

The Artiicle is abot GPU's not CPU's

[RotateLeftByte]

And as far as raw performance goes, Intel GPU's are a bit 2nd division. Granted that they have opened up their specs. However this has tipped the hand of ATI(AMD) and Nvidia to do the same with theirs.
After all, how many top notch graphics cards are there on the market that use Intel GPU's?

Here, AMD seem to be saying that we are looking at ways to change parts of the GPU so that bits that we can't get permission to release(patents DRM etc etc) are no longer used. To me, that is good news. That statement has nowt to do with Intel or Nvidia.
This is an ongoing process and will not happen overnight. Remember that Sun took a long time to open up the Solaris source code due to licensing issues. IMHO, this is just the same process.

Correction: Don't buy Vista.

[n dot l]

DRM "functionality" in hardware? No thanks. You know, I remember an NVIDIA engineer complaining to me about how they'd had to do a bunch of really fucked up stuff to get the G80 GPUs to support HD playback on Vista. I'm pretty sure Intel's latest stuff has to deal with the same bullshit too. So really, the title of your post should read "Don't buy post-Vista GPUs". That kinda puts a damper on the whole 3D graphics thing, doesn't it?

Better advice would be, "Don't run your new GPU on an OS that forces it to enable the stupid DRM logic that the engineers really didn't want to build into it in the first place." Yeah, that's much better.

The End Times are Near

[sykopomp]

..it's the only conclusion I can reach. ATi drivers are going to be Linux-friendly, the courts and colleges are actively pushing back against the RIAA and MPAA, both of which are starting to change their business model, and Duke Nukem Forever is actually going to be done at some point.

Hold me, I'm scared.