AMD's OverDrive and CrossFire Come To Linux
twljagflba writes "Since last year AMD has made ATI increasingly Linux friendly by releasing 3D programming guides and helping out the open-source community. At the same time they have been continuing to develop their binary Catalyst driver for the Linux platform and most recently they delivered same-day support for their new graphics cards. Today though they have released the Catalyst 8.8 Linux driver that adds two very important features: CrossFire and OverDrive support for Linux. Linux users are now able to use CrossFire to split the rendering workload between multiple GPUs and they're also able to overclock their graphics cards now using the binary-only driver. Phoronix has a complete run-down on both features — including benchmarks — in their AMD OverDrive on Linux and ATI Radeon CrossFire On Linux articles. Other features were also introduced in this update such as Linux 2.6.26 kernel support, Adaptive Anti-Aliasing, and other fixes."
GREAT! Now I can play ... uh ... well, someone can make some visually awesome (exclusive) games that I can play for linux!
YOTLD FTW!
I would snap up a 790GX-based board in no time flat for HTPC / big-screen gaming purposes, but it doesn't support more than 2-channel LPCM over the HDMI port!!
I've got to say I'm disappointed they don't provide Crossfire numbers for the same hardware on Windows. It's nice that Crossfire can improve things in some situations and some games that are supported under Linux, but I'd like to know the relative benefit.
That is, when going to Crossfire do both Windows and Linux gain 40 FPS? Or do they both go up 60%? Or does Windows go up by 70% to 100 FPS where Linux only goes up 40% to 80 FPS?
How close are they? That's what I'd like to know.
I also find the "we had no problems except for some segfaults during Quake Wars, and they say that will be fixed in a month or two with the next version" a little worrying. A problem with a driver is a game looking off, or having slow frame rates. Segfaulting the system is not a problem, it's a BIG PROBLEM.
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
It's nice to see they are providing both their own driver implementation AND the specs for OSS drivers.
Once the OSS drivers are done, then even within the realm AMD cards, users will still have some choice.
At least in Linux. Us FreeBSD users will have the OSS only...
Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
my shell will run a lot faster! i'm wondering my "ls" performance.
Okay, quick question. Let's say my nvidia 6600GT is ready to go and a new card put in its place...
assuming I don't have a moral problem with closed-source drivers...
Is the general consensus these days to go with an ATI card and NOT nVidia? It used to be, when I was shopping for cards 3 years ago, that nVidia was the way to go as they had better drivers. Does ATI's cooperation with open source developers recommend their cards as friendlier/better w/my Gentoo system?
No matter how hard AMD tries, ATI will be a second choice for linux-box builders for years at least. The Nvidia drivers are currently much more reliable than their ATI counterparts, and forcing Nvidia's reputation for greatness to disappear will be very tough for ATI, unless Nvidia screws up big-time. It's nice to see that they're trying, though.
I just went through hell and back getting my 1950pro to work last week end.
Moral of the story hard work is never rewarded only procrastination is
will it run KDE 4.1?
Since last year AMD has made ATI increasingly Linux friendly...
On average, my experience with ATI's drivers kind of go like this:
Compare this to the usual Nvidia install process.
/^([Ss]ame [Bb]at (time, |channel.)){2}$/
Maybe AMD can get a bit more underdog support from the tech savy linux crowd. ATI binaries are on the up and Nvidia seems to be flat lined... Who knows what will happen.
Now can ATI submit a kernel patch so we can use our FPU in cuda like fashion for all tasks? That would be nice. Can we also get a kernel patch that can automagically detect other local computers and automagically use their CPUs/FPUs real time in addition to the local terminal like a beowulf cluster?
These are things that should've already happened a couple years back.
"Yes, my cell phone is slow, but when I'm on my wifi-N network, it has the power of my desktop quad 4 extreme, and I can even play farcry 2 and run Vista in a VM simultaneously, if my laptop is also on and idle. Or I can log on automagically VNC style with hi speed video to either system."
"I can put each of those desktops on different sides of my compiz cube in fullscreen, and the computer feels completely local, but with additional clustering processor and memory performance, all of which I can back up as a .VDI on a USB stick".
Why are we eternally stuck in XEROX parc c.1982?
I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
Just WTF did you think I said? I'd buy ATI tech today because of the free drivers. As I understand it, the performance of the ATI Linux blobs doesn't completely match that of their Windows ones, where the nVidia drivers pretty much do. Can you educate me with a link to facts?
Does that mean we now have h.264 and/or Blu-ray support under Linux?
And I don't mean "I can play my 1080p Batman Begins just fine on my 2.6 GHz Quad Core" crap. I mean something that allows me to build a low power HTPC running Linux with hardware decoding.
We do not live in the 21st century. We live in the 20 second century.
I'm starting to get tired of _hearing myself_ say this, but it is not getting any better. When are they going to support us in our efforts to decode HD video on a GPU? We need ridiculously powerful CPU in a Linux machine to even come close to what a low power MSFT machine can do with HD video. The reason is that MSFT can offload the work to the GPU.
Seriously!!! What the heck is going on here? Why do the GPU makers want us to invest our money in CPUs instead of GPUs? Wouldn't ATI and nVidia rather get our money than driving us to give it to Intel and ADM? This is crazy.
High end gaming on Linux, which would utilize the new advanced hardware, is somewhere in the future. But, HD video and Linux based HTPCs are in the present. MythTV is ready today. It was ready 2 years ago. If only the GPUs would open the door to HD video on hardware that couldn't heat a Canadian Movie Theater and sound like a jet engine.
If the GPU support would have been available 2 years ago when I gave up on my MythTV, by now Linux PVRs would be the most viable Home Theater solution "on the market". A huge opportunity was lost. I think that there is still more opportunity, but it is being piddled away.
The only stable state is the one in which all men are equal before the
You've parsed the text wrong. Watch how the list matches up when you examine what I really wrote: "nVidia[1], Intel[2] or ATI[3] graphics for Linux depends upon their preference for powerful but proprietary binaries[1], free software compositing and low power consumption[2] or the choice of reasonable performance in ATI's binaries or high-performance free software from the X.Org drivers[3]."
Unless you're nitpicking about free software/open source, what did you mean? (And if you're on that trip, the Intel drivers in X.Org are MIT/BSD licensed and those in the Linux Kernel are GPLv2.)