Page 2 of 22 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 217

Thread: AMD Releases Catalyst 9.6 For Linux

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    51

    Default

    Another useless driver,

    - No support for kernel 2.6.29 or 2.6.30.
    - Legacy GPUs code is still there though disabled making the download too big and not letting legacy users enjoy this code while it is still there, what a selfish bunch.
    -No support for Linux yet, just three outdated distributions.

    Guys, I can go as far as to say that kernel 2.6.30 or .31 for that matter, support will be added by the 9.9 if we are lucky or 9.10 release.

    Yesterday I was still an AMD supporter even though I hated ATI. Today, I hate AMD and ATI. Is so sad, I won't buy AMD and even less ATI anymore.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    3

    Post

    @JeanPaul145: you can grab it here: https://a248.e.akamai.net/f/674/9206...x86.x86_64.run

  3. #13
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    19

    Default

    I just would like to know:

    "Why?!"

    You got one month to prepare good working driver with support, many people was even giving code to support new kernel's but no. This driver should be called 'Catalyst for stable/old Ubuntu', not Catalyst for Linux. You do not support stable kernels, you do not support alpha kernels. Then what the hell you support?

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    548

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JeanPaul145 View Post
    It seems AMD is aware of that. Catalyst 9.6 isn't even available for download yet.
    Just replace 9-5 by 9-6 in the URL for the download ...

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    116

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mendieta View Post
    Just replace 9-5 by 9-6 in the URL for the download ...
    Yeah between that post and this one they changed it. I'm installing it right now, wondering in what wonderful ways the June '09 edition of fglrx will disappoint me.

    EDIT: I see the whole xorg-server-patch-removal-causing-terrible-delays-on-unminimizing-windows thing hasn't been cleared up yet. Back to Metacity for me.

    I must say, I'm getting mighty tired of always wondering what functionality will get broken with my AMD card, and then not getting timely fixes for that breakage once it happens.if this keeps up my next gfx card (admittedly more than a year or two away) will come from the stables of Nvidia.

    @the AMD execs: I get the whole professional-businesses-make-us-money thing, but don't forget about the Linux desktop people please. Unreleased UVD2 code, mediocre performance on high-end gfx cards, updates barely even worth updating to (and getting less so every month)... This is the reward we get for buying an AMD gfx card. If you have a shortage of manpower, just hire more people. Don't give us the economic crisis excuse (developers don't cost *THAT* much, just fire a couple of execs with poor job performance reviews or something...), just listen to your customers. All of them.
    P.S.: I'm fully aware of the FOSS drivers, but those don't really currently help those of us with an R600/R700 card now do they
    Last edited by JeanPaul145; 06-15-2009 at 04:25 PM.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    548

    Default

    That's nice. We've been all asking for Open Source graphics drivers and open specs for years. Now that AMD/ATI do it, we flame them. How cool are we?

    Granted, NVIDIA's binary only support is better as such, so I would probably by an NVIDIA card in the short term if that;s the only thing going (and I've been _this_ close to doing it a lil ago out of frustration with ati + ubuntu 9.04).

    But in the long run ATI and Intel are the way to go. And we should be respectful of them for doing the right thing.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    45

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mendieta View Post
    That's nice. We've been all asking for Open Source graphics drivers and open specs for years. Now that AMD/ATI do it, we flame them. How cool are we?

    Granted, NVIDIA's binary only support is better as such, so I would probably by an NVIDIA card in the short term if that;s the only thing going (and I've been _this_ close to doing it a lil ago out of frustration with ati + ubuntu 9.04).

    But in the long run ATI and Intel are the way to go. And we should be respectful of them for doing the right thing.
    But providing open specs and drivers didn't fix any problems so of course people are still mad. Things are supposed to be instantly better when you do that.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    51

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mendieta View Post
    That's nice. We've been all asking for Open Source graphics drivers and open specs for years. Now that AMD/ATI do it, we flame them. How cool are we?

    [...]

    But in the long run ATI and Intel are the way to go. And we should be respectful of them for doing the right thing.
    Their open source driver is a trash for rx600 cards and above, and their closed source drivers is a trash. So, am I going to be happy with buying something that doesn't work as it should because the company that makes it doesn;t even know how to make a driver for it.

    At least NVIDIAs closed source driver is so good that you don;t even wish for an open source one.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,274

    Default

    If you're still using fglrx, you're doing it wrong.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    574

    Default

    Everytime I see a new AMD fglrx release I start to laugh... and I can't stop. AMD Catalyst isn't a driver, it's a joke or just a bad dream.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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