AMD Catalyst 9.12 Hotfix released

[RealNC]

AMD has released a "hotfix" update for 9.12:

http://support.amd.com/us/kbarticles...912Hotfix.aspx

This claims to fix issues on both Linux and Windows:

"Hotfix that resolves the mouse being enlarged under Windows® 7, improves performance of OpenGL games, Provides CrossFireX™ support for Eyefinity & Provides support for OpenCL."

I have to wonder though what this "Linux Vista 32/64-bit edition" operating system is at the end of the document.

Edit:
An interesting tidbit from the "check.sh" script inside the zip:

"# check for 7.5, Map Xorg 7.5 to x740"

Hm? Does that mean this one runs on X.Org 7.5? Can someone test? :P

[Kano]

Interesting driver, xvba seems to work again. It does not fully crash with my h264 5.1 testfile but it does not render it correctly. There is no signature in there, so best do a backup of /etc/ati/signature before. ATI should really update the 9-12 driver and replace it by the hotfix.

[RealNC]

There is no signature in there, so best do a backup of /etc/ati/signature before.

Now that's lame. "Hotfixes" are not supposed to display any watermarks; they are intended for end-users, not beta testers. In Windows AFAIK there's never a watermark on Hotfix drivers.

[Technojunkie]

Still fails on Fedora 12 X.org 7.5.

[Qaridarium]

Interesting driver, xvba seems to work again. It does not fully crash with my h264 5.1 testfile but it does not render it correctly. There is no signature in there, so best do a backup of /etc/ati/signature before. ATI should really update the 9-12 driver and replace it by the hotfix.

its simple why not the hot-fix driver isn't a 9.12 driver...
the hot-fix driver is an 10.1 beta or 10.2 alpfa...
noting more....

the best side of this crapy driver is -openGL3.2 brings software peace to "wine"

first time i think that wine does not use any nvidia only extansion because openGL3.2 do have all needet extansions......

in my point of view.... nvidia is out of the marked !

no one wana nvidia only software anymore!

[Kano]

No, 8.68 is 9-12 not 10-1 which would be 8.69 and 10-2 will be 8.70. xvba is only minimally fixed, i could not crash the system with the one file it used to crash - but it does not decode it at all. all other problems like bad colors are still there. also i do not think that this is the first driver to support opengl 3.2, just the first that changes the version for the older method to show it like nvidia does. nvidia is definitely much more advanced, the only thing that nvidia is behind are dx11 capable cards. Most likely it will be cebit time when you can buy em, but then ati is out of the way completely. for video playback even the new cheap g210 would be enough.

[mirv]

I wouldn't count on fermi matching up against ati in the dx11 space - fermi is more directed at gpgpu as far as I'm aware. It would be interesting though to see how it matches up in OpenGL.

-- if/when fermi is released.

[Kano]

I am pretty certain that nv will deliver top performance with a new card, which might have got the double price than ati's solution however

[Kano]

Well i found out that hotfix driver has now other "features". Not only the signature file is missing, no even the control file is different that means that basically working hardware is now UNSUPPORTED. ati should at least update the hotfix with a better suited control file.

[Kano]

@bridgman

Can you tell my why serveral things are wrong with the hotfix which was made on the 15th dec?

a) Supported PCI IDs are the same as 9-12 final but the control file is crippled

b) Why is the signature missing

c) Why was the packageing not updated - 9-12 final packageing is wrong for Ubuntu - it does not package the 2 extra qt4 libs needed for amdcccle on older systems.

d) When xvba is partly working why is

                    #[WL} Remove 64bit support for Maximus as it is not currently ready
                    #cp -R arch/${ArchDir}/usr/X11R6/lib64/libAMDXvBA*.* \
                    #      ${TmpDrvFilesDir}/${ATI_XLIB_64}
                    #cp -R arch/${ArchDir}/usr/X11R6/lib64/libXvBAW*.* \
                    #      ${TmpDrvFilesDir}/${ATI_XLIB_64}

still in ati-installer.sh? Are only 32 bit systems supposed to use xvba when you don't use distro packageing?

e) Who is now responsible for fglrx when it is not mtippett anymore?