AMD Puts Out Radeon HD 6000 Open-Source Driver
An anonymous reader writes "AMD has just released their open-source driver for the Radeon HD 6000 series graphics cards (sans the Cayman GPUs) with KMS, 2D, and 3D acceleration."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
For all the Slashdot posters who keep begging for Linux support and talking about how big companies constantly ignore you, this is your chance.
Buy AMD. Be vocal that the reason you're buying an AMD video card is because of their driver. Vote with your wallet.
(On the CPU front, you can make an equal case for Intel supporting open source).
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
So when does Myth get 3D Blue Ray Support?
All generalizations are false, including this one. Mark Twain
I didn't see any mention of VAAPI or XvBA Acceleration for playing media? How about OpenCL support?
Granted the HD 6000 looks more like a gamers card than something you'd stick in a home theater pc, but I'd think that OpenCL support would interest quite a few people doing massive number crunching. Especially since there's even PyOpenCL available.
Maybe this means by 5850 will finally stop being completely useless on Linux. I guess by the time these ones come out, the 5000 series drivers should be usable...
In the past two years I've migrated from 10+ loyal Linux NVidia years to ATI. The ATI closed source drivers were reasonable whilst the NVidia drivers showed a slide in performance and stability (on my system in any case). Since September last year I've migrated my machines to the open source 3d drivers and what a beaut! My MythTV frontend with ATI onboard is impeccable. It'll require much to convince me to change away from ATI/AMD if they keep this kind of support available.
!
I thought the biggest stopper in building OSS 3D drivers were that they usually contain technologies covered by software patents. What happened to the patented parts? Have they been stripped out of this OSS version, with the effect that it is now slower than its closed-source counterpart? Or did they find another way out?
My first program:
Hell Segmentation fault
I didn't realize it was on fire.
Check out my novel.
I can't find any info, so which version of OpenGL is supported? Is GL4 supported? Also how's the performance compared to the closed driver? I see everyone cherishing AMD for this, but being the news about a high performance 3D card, i'd expect the usefulness of their drivers and the real effort of open sourcing is on the 3D side, not so much on the 2D side and there's practically no information about this.
Sorry, but ATI driver is still PISS POOR relative to nVidia. It seems that everytime I install ANY distribution (... well, Fedora, Ubuntu or SUSE,) nVidia Just Works (tm)(r) but with ATI I have to download some weird thing from ATI, and the stuff (almost) never work right.
You can say what you want about having an ideologically "open driver" but frankly most end users want the stuff to Just Works (tm)(r). My own experience is that ATI is still VERY FAR from Just Works (tm)(r).
ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
Sorry, but ATI driver is still PISS POOR relative to nVidia. It seems that everytime I install ANY distribution (... well, Fedora, Ubuntu or SUSE,) nVidia Just Works (tm)(r) but with ATI I have to download some weird thing from ATI, and the stuff (almost) never work right.
Simply not true for current offerings. Both Radeon and NVidia proprietary drivers + install scripts are a pain, and both are better than they used to be. Both offerings are fast as hell, but if you want hassle free kernel upgrades, nothing comes close to the open source Radeon drivers.
Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
I realize this is a troll, but I recently upgraded my system and initially couldn't boot Ubuntu. No big deal, I thought, I'll just install Windows and use that until Natty comes out, and maybe I'll have better luck with the new kernel. So to get my Windows environment up to speed I had to install a third-party, 32-bit IM app (Trillian) for which I had to register a new account I'll never use; I had to install Microsoft Security Essentials and Live Essentials (of which I only would use Live E-mail); I had to download and install OpenOffice; download and install all of my drivers for all of my devices; download and install Collab Subversion (which also requires an account registration), TortoiseSVN, and Maven; and then I had to set up paths, etc. After all that (about 10 hours of downloading and installing) I still didn't have a decent terminal and no SSH. So I had to download PuTTY, which, while good, is no substitute for gnome-terminal and GNU utils. Still no less, tail, grep, vi, symbolic links, mount utilities, etc., so I was looking at *also* installing Cygwin (32-bit!) and dealing with that hassle.
Not to mention that there were 59 critical updates that took about 3 hours to download and install.
Needless to say, about 24 hours into the change I was nearly having panic attacks at the prospect of using this system. I was seriously contemplating downgrading and sending my new parts back and eating the restocking fees.
Luckily it turns out that my Ubuntu issue was related to a hardware conflict between my old Audigy 2 card and the on-board IEEE 1394 on the new mobo (I think). Once I ripped out the Audigy I didn't have a single issue with Ubuntu. Took me all of 2 hours to install the OS and what I needed via the software center, and that including downloading and installing the 212 updates. (Note that more than half of the stuff I had to manually install under Windows was already there in the base Ubuntu install, and I didn't have to register any accounts.)
From time to time I look at hardware compatibility, video performance, etc. and think that I might be happier in Windows. And maybe I would be, if I didn't have to do anything productive. But from a development perspective Windows is Hell, and I will not go back to it by choice.
Good morning. How was you hibernation?
I work at a company that does embedded systems. One of the candidates is a product VIA is offering.
Via breached it's promise to provide open source drivers for their graphics offerings.
I will with great glee wreck any chance of using their product.
I've been pretty impressed with the closed source NVidia drivers but I'll definitely consider switching to AMD the next time I'm shopping for parts. I totally get the idea of not caring about politics so long as your video works but there are a few disadvantages to the closed source drivers.
1) Polish - They have their own configuration utility. NVidia-settings is nice enough but it makes a distro seem kind of unpolished when there is this nice KDE or Gnome control panel for setting resolution and such but it doesn't work and the user has to figure out that they need to run nvidia-settings instead. Of course this is meaningless if you are the type that would just prefer to edit xorg.conf by hand.
2) New kernels - I can't count the number of times I have installed a new kernel, rebooted and thought something was broken for a moment before I remembered oh, yah, I have to recompile nvidia-drivers. Again!
3) Longevity - I suppose I can't complain too much, I have some pretty old NVidia cards which still work with the NVidia drivers. Some day though they will not. Of course when that day comes I can continue to use the old drivers but eventually they will not work with a recent X. And someday an old X will not work with a recent application... Yes, it sounds cheap to care but there is nothing wrong with that. Certainly I will never care about this for a fast gaming PC but that's no reason not to pass the cards down to less speed critical machines which family members use for web browsing, document editing and such... Open source drivers will probably keep getting ported just about forever just because they can and that one person who cares and can program is still out there. This was one of the reasons I switched to Linux years ago... I had network cards which I used to run 98 on for which there were no XP drivers. This was back when a network card was $50 and I was a college student living on Ramen noodles. Linux drivers still exist today!
I was working on someone's MCE and it was a bit of a pain. I had updated (through Ubuntu's update service) the graphics driver, and ... they didn't work. Some library was expecting some other version or something. It was a pain...
That said, I've not really touched ATi stuff outside of Windows (I've been using ATi for almost all my Windows computers).
Gallium3D architecture can easily bring opensource OpenCL support to modern GPUs.
It's unlike classical Mesa or closed source, where each platform gets its own full fledged drivers with its own set of supported APIs.
Basically, Gallium3D is a whole infrastructure, where, on one side you have hardware driver which just expose the basic functionality and capabilities that modern hardware feature, in a generic way. At the other side, you have state trackers, modules which listen for peculiar high-level api (for example OpenGL 2.0) and interpret it and translate it to low level calls to the hardware module.
As soon as a new hardware module is written, it gets automagically support for all the APIs supported by Gallium3D (There's a Gallium3D modules for Radeon HD6000. It supports OpenGL 3.0 out of the box because Gallium has a tracker for it).
As soon as a new API module is written, it gets automahically support for all the hardware supported by Gallium3D (There's recently a DX10/11 state tracker written for linux (to help porting and to help wine). It is immediatly usable on Intel, nVidia Nouveu, and ATI r600 drivers)
So regarding OpenCL : Yes it should be possible soon, such API tracker are currently in development. See Zack Rusin's blog if you're curious.
Regarding Video Acceleration : The situation is more complex. Modern GPU have dedicated silicon for video acceleration. The problem is that the same piece of hardware is also responsible for enforcing DRM. Thus the technical details are a nest of patent, license, and DRM madness.
Instead of using this dedicated silicon, there are Video State trackers (vdpau api to be specific) for Gallium3D running the decoding on the main GPU silicon.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
PitaBred writes:
> Token? They've been working on open source drivers for the
> GPUs ever since AMD bought ATI. What more do you want?
I want enough resources provided so that *all* the features
are documented. In particular, UVD. Bridgman says that would
take about another 12 top people (6 for UVD, 6 for other).
According to yahoo, AMD has a market cap of $6.07 Billion,
a profit margin of 19.97%, and 10,400 full time employees.
AMD can easily afford another 12 people. There is no excuse
for a company of this size not properly documenting its products.
I've seen much better/complete documentation from projects done by
1-3 guys in their garage. So how do we convince AMD's management?
Evanisincontrol writes:
> I'd be surprised if VAAPI wasn't a high priority for this driver.
Be surprised. Video decode is at the bottom of Bridgman's
priority list. We need to either change his mind or get
him more people.
But don't trust my paraphrases, read Bridgman's own words here:
http://www.phoronix.com/forums/showthread.php?t=28075&page=6
Still a bit buggy - sound stopped working.
you shouldn't use (tm) and (r) at the same time. (r) means registered trademark and (tm) means just trademark. It's like writing "(c) Copyright 2011"
Now they just need to release one for their earlier GPUs. Not all of us can afford the latest-and-greatest...
I have been avoiding ATI cards and binary driver in my Debian/Linux boxes. I want stability and speed like NVIDIA's. Is it time to switch yet like with my two years old ATI Radeon 4870 video card?
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).