Page 13 of 14 FirstFirst ... 311121314 LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 140

Thread: ATI dropping support for <R600 - wtf!?

  1. #121
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,514

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stormking View Post
    For five years, I got promises. About how the driver will be better, soon. Month after month after month.
    This is the part I just don`t get. I have gone through every single press release, interview and on or off-record employee comment I could find on the internet and haven`t found *anything* like that. There is the occasional announcement talking about open source drivers or workstation drivers but that`s all I have been able to find.

    Quote Originally Posted by Stormking View Post
    And now? More promises. About how great the open source driver will be some time in the future. I don't care about a year from now. I want to use my laptop, *NOW*. I haven't been able to do that (to the full extent) for the greater part of its lifetime. In a year or two (when I assume the OSS driver will be feature complete, optimized and stable) I will very likely not use this hardware, anymore.
    Yeah, this is the heart of it. Your laptop. Designed for Windows, tested by the OEM on Windows, bugs fixed for Windows before shipment. Desktops are fairly generic and (with the exception of AGP and high memory) different users tend to see similar results. Laptops are much more heavily customized, and the reason they work so well with Windows is that all of the qualification and platform-specific driver code is worked out with the OEM before the laptop ships.

    That doesn`t happen with Linux, and (with the exception of a few OEM preloads) may never happen. The reason so many people are beating on you about getting more involved with the development effort is that so far this has been the only way to make up for the fact that platform integration is still done pretty much completely on Windows and MacOS, not Linux.

    If you want the same kind of platform-specific diagnosis and fixing that goes along with a Windows or MacOS system (and the much larger market share), then either OEMs are going to have to be convinced that shipping with pre-loaded Linux (along with all the associated qualification testing) is a good investment, or *someone* with your specific system and priorities is going to have to get involved personally, using the open source drivers.

    Don`t wait a couple of years. Make a list of what doesn`t work on your laptop today with the open source drivers and I think you`ll find that the issues are either already fixed, are in the pipe for fairly short term resolution, or need fixes specific to your platform which are only going to happen with your involvement.

  2. #122
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    112

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bridgman View Post
    Yeah, this is the heart of it. Your laptop. Designed for Windows, tested by the OEM on Windows, bugs fixed for Windows before shipment. Desktops are fairly generic and (with the exception of AGP and high memory) different users tend to see similar results. Laptops are much more heavily customized, and the reason they work so well with Windows is that all of the qualification and platform-specific driver code is worked out with the OEM before the laptop ships.
    First of all, before I bought that damn thing, I checked every feature I wanted to use for the availability of linux drivers. I had positive experiences with NVIDIAs closed source drivers for linux. Not in a dream I would have thought that those of its direct competitioner ATI could be so crappy.

    Then: I know that it is possible for my card to work under Linux. All the features I want to use worked at some point. Just not all of them with the same driver version. And there were driver version that even did it all (the one before 8.22.x). But one can't stay with an old kernel, forever.

  3. #123
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Würzburg, Germany
    Posts
    36

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by duby229 View Post
    I think you need to read up on what open source actually means.
    Well, my arrogant friend, I presume I pretty well know what opensource means; however, we seem to disagree on the question whose responsibility the development of driver code for hardware advertised as "supported on linux" is. If you find that this question is covered by the definition of opensource or the legal content of different opensource licenses, feel free to drop a link.

    Oh, by the way: in which mode are you going to contribute to the development of the opensource drivers?

  4. #124
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    112

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bridgman View Post
    Don`t wait a couple of years. Make a list of what doesn`t work on your laptop today with the open source drivers and I think you`ll find that the issues are either already fixed, are in the pipe for fairly short term resolution, or need fixes specific to your platform which are only going to happen with your involvement.
    I think we already met in the X-randomly-freezes-thread in the FOSS driver subsection of this forum.

    Also, one of the most important drawbacks of the FOSS driver is the OpenGL performance. 60 - 70% of the closed source driver's performance is not an acceptable replacement for the "loss" of it.
    Last edited by Stormking; 03-08-2009 at 01:34 PM.

  5. #125
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,514

    Default

    OK, thanks; I'll go back and check that thread.

    re: performance, the 60-70% number is an estimate averaged across applications and across GPU generations.

    The simpler apps which get run the most under Linux will tend to run faster than the most demanding ones, since the hardest optimization work is usually related to bandwidth-constrained situations on specific applications.

    Older GPUs will typically have less of a performance delta than newer GPUs, since the biggest benefit from a more advanced shader compiler comes with the superscalar shader core in 6xx and above. For 5xx and below, with vector pipes rather than superscalar pipes, the shader compiler in fglrx has much less opportunity to optimize. A lot of the really slow performance in 3D on the open source drivers today is from software fallbacks related to missing GL 2.0 features, not the inherent performance of the driver stack.
    Last edited by bridgman; 03-08-2009 at 03:45 PM.

  6. #126
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    6,641

    Default

    @bridgman

    The Win drivers will be updated still every 3rd month (that's what was written in a news article in german), will the Linux drivers get then updates again too?

  7. #127
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,514

    Default

    No, we're going to be doing ongoing support for Linux via the open source drivers rather than quarterly updates of fglrx.

    The rationale is that most of the people using fglrx on older GPUs in a consumer environment are looking for additional features and functionality, not just minor bug fixes and keeping it working on new X, kernel and distro releases. Given that, going with the open source drivers seems like the right approach.

  8. #128
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Radoboj, Croatia
    Posts
    155

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bridgman View Post
    Just to be clear, we're changing support level for all OSes, not just Linux. There's no new OS support for Windows either, although in fairness the impact on Windows users is less because Windows tends to keep ABI compliance and also releases new OS upgrades at a much slower rate.
    So, no Windows 7 for my laptop?

  9. #129
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,353

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DirtyHairy View Post
    Well, my arrogant friend, I presume I pretty well know what opensource means; however, we seem to disagree on the question whose responsibility the development of driver code for hardware advertised as "supported on linux" is. If you find that this question is covered by the definition of opensource or the legal content of different opensource licenses, feel free to drop a link.

    Oh, by the way: in which mode are you going to contribute to the development of the opensource drivers?
    The hubris of the misinformed....

    You can call me arrogant all you want, but it still doesnt change the fact that it doesnt matter what AMD promised. AMD could promise the earth and the moon and it doesnt matter. The simple matter of fact is that as of this announcement the open source driver --WILL-- improve far beyond what it otherwise would have. I've already explained this, but I'll explain it again if I must. The power behind an open source development model is simply put: The size of it's user base. The bigger the user base is the more potential developers that project will have. And that really is the bottom line. What AMD has done here is they have dramatically increased the size of the open source drivers user base. And what they'll need to do in the future is better organize the manpower in the developer base. And that is nothing but good.

    You attack AMD for not supporting there drivers, but the reality is that what they have done is actually much better then just that. Simply supporting the hardware isnt enough.

  10. #130
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,514

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DoDoENT View Post
    So, no Windows 7 for my laptop?
    The Windows developers have a different view of ABI compatibility from what I can see. Vista could load XP drivers (albeit with limited functionality AFAIK), and my understanding is that Win7 will work with existing Vista drivers.

    What you won't get with older GPUs is the newer WDDM 1.1 driver model, which support some additional features such as using DX10 for DWM. You will get Vista-level functionality and morewith Vista drivers, including Aero Glass.

    If a new Windows release causes an existing binary driver to stop working, the Windows devs tend to treat that as *their* problem and their responsibility to fix. If a new Linux kernel or X server causes an existing binary driver to stop working, it's regarded as a driver problem (or "a good start", depending on the developer ).

    Perversely, that makes graphics driver maintenance for Linux even *more* expensive than the same level of support for Windows.

    While building Windows 7, Microsoft is attempting to resolve scenarios that managed to successfully handicap Windows Vista in terms of compatibility. In this context, in order not to break devices that currently work with its precursor, Windows 7 will come to the table, from the get-go, with support for all Vista-certified drivers. Compatibility with devices designed for Vista ensures that users will have a seamless upgrade/migration experience. Grant George, the VP of Test for the Windows Experience, revealed that Microsoft had full compatibility with Vista-certified drivers for Windows 7 as a primary goal.
    http://news.softpedia.com/news/The-W...y-102076.shtml
    Last edited by bridgman; 03-08-2009 at 03:54 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •