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."

Put up or shut up...

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.

Are they open?

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?

Re:Are they open?

Right now I would settle for a driver that works on recent kernels since one of those improvements mean much to me if I can't actually install them.

I used to be a huge ATI fan but I've completely stopped buying their stuff. If they can't be bothered to make working drivers or have useful support answers. I can't be bothered to shell out money for something that's just going into the garbage bin anyways.

NVIDIA is marginally better.. at least these stuff works even if I have to reinstall the X.org drivers every time I update a kernel.

Re:Are they open?

NVIDIA has long since had a handle on your "latest/nonstandard kernel" problem. It builds its own interfaces to conform to the kernel's.

Re:Are they open?

They're useless to me unless the source is available, preferably under the GPL.

Out of interest, why GPL? The rest of DRI (and x.org) is MIT licensed, including the Intel drivers. The only parts that are GPL'd are the kernel modules (which do a small amount of validation and pass instructions to the hardware). Keeping the majority of the drivers MIT licensed makes it much easier for people to add support for other operating systems, such as FreeBSD and Solaris (both of which are supported by nVidias blobs, although only FreeBSD has good support for Intel chips since no one has ported DRI to Solaris yet).

Hey AMD, A tip for you.

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.

Re:Hey AMD, A tip for you.

What's wrong with the i-tal "nv" driver? Never installed nVidious's closed-source crap, never likely to.

It's 2d only. Ie, no Beryl/Compiz. It also doesn't seem to be very stable. I use that driver on my PowerBook (it runs Ubuntu), but X freezes half of the time I try to play a video*. If I'm at home I have to ssh in from another machine and kill X so I can use the thing again, or if I'm anywhere else I have to reboot (keyboard and mouse are frozen as is everything on the desktop, ctrl-alt-backspace doesn't do anything).

* It doesn't matter whether I'm using VLC, Xine, Mplayer, or Totem. I happens very often, which is why I'll usually just boot it into OS X if I want to play a dvd or avi.

Also, in reply to Lumpy (gp), why is it so hard to go to "System->Administration->Restricted Drivers Manager"? I've done that with a few GeForce4 (integrated) cards and it's as easy as typing your password and clicking a button.

If you're not running 7.04, then just do "System->Administration->Synaptic Package Manager" and do a search for "nvidia-glx". Install that and it should work (you might have to change /etc/X11/xorg.conf to "nvidia" rather than "nv", I don't remember if that's automatic or not).

Ubuntu is by far the easiest distro to install 3d graphics drivers on since they provide the packages. No compiling and it will always work across reboots since the driver gets updated when the kernel does.

It's nice to see DAAMIT finally getting there

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.

I definitely made a brilliant move

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.

If you want Linux and open

Please try and support The Open Graphics Project.
http://wiki.opengraphics.org./tiki-index.php?page= AboutOpenGraphics [wiki.opengraphics.org]

Any video accel lovin'?

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 [mythtv.org], I fear it's still a one-horse town.

Whoa! Spiteful much?

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.

AMD to open up graphics specs

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 [lwn.net]

Re:AMD to open up graphics specs

All graphics cards from the R500 going forward, specifically.

Still, THIS should be an article on Slashdot with the new drivers being a footnote -- not the other way around.

Re:AMD to open up graphics specs

That's huge. I hope this is true. I hope it's done fast.
Available, truly open sourced drivers are going to be a big factor in any hardware purchase I make.
I'm just one, but I think I'm one of many. Even if you're not "paranoid" (concerned) it's obsolecense protection.

Money where your mouth is

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.

Pathetic

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...

Re:Is the driver open-source?

Here, you dropped your tinfoil hat.

Re:Is the driver open-source?

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.

Re:Is the driver open-source?

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).

Re:Is the driver open-source?

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.

Re:3D is important; Do what Linus does: buy Intel

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.

Re:3D is important; Do what Linus does: buy Intel

"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.

Re:Is the driver open-source?

> 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.

Re:And?

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?