Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 102

Thread: Catalyst 10.1 and Xorg 7.5 / 1.7.x?

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Paderborn
    Posts
    40

    Default Catalyst 10.1 and Xorg 7.5 / 1.7.x?

    Hello,

    currently fglrx is RC buggy in Debian unstable, because Xorg 7.5/1.7.x is uploaded and fglrx 9-12 still does not have support for it.

    Does anyone know, if 10-1 will add the missing support?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    6,607

    Default

    Just use Kanotix based on Debian Lenny, that's still working. I doubt that something before 10-4 will get support, maybe a beta for it as that would be for U 10.04 release. ATI ignores every other distro - Fedora had Xorg long ago and ATI did not care - HD5xxx users even have got fun with vesa driver only.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    625

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by the-me View Post
    Hello,

    currently fglrx is RC buggy in Debian unstable, because Xorg 7.5/1.7.x is uploaded and fglrx 9-12 still does not have support for it.

    Does anyone know, if 10-1 will add the missing support?
    In the past the fglrx support only software which is shipped with the supported distributions.

    Maybe with 10.04 we get an beta or rc with ubuntu and 3 or 4 month later the final version.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    99

    Default

    Ubuntu will be on Xserver 1.8.

    That means Ubuntu will ship without fglrx support - it's too new for them.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    625

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by damentz View Post
    Ubuntu will be on Xserver 1.8.

    That means Ubuntu will ship without fglrx support - it's too new for them.
    I think then AMD release for Ubuntu an beta with xserver 1.8 support. and some MOnth later the Final version with xserver 1.8

  6. #6

    Default

    This is a big issue for me. I just got an HD4670 card to replace my old Nvidia card. I had read that ATI's driver support was pretty good nowadays, and I certainly wanted to support the realease of specs.
    But now I discover that ATI's driver doesn't even support a 3 month old Xorg release, the one I'm using no less. I had no such problems with Nvidia. Now I either have to downgrade my Xorg package and presumably have to live with being a release behind Xorg (and prevent Arch from upgrading that package), or simply return this card and get a Nvidia card.

    Is this a common occurence, or is this a one-off issue? And when (if ever?) should I expect ATI to provide support for this 3 month old Xorg release?

    Also, I was under the impression that the open source driver had at least basic 3D-support, but it doesn't seem work for me.. Maybe it doesn't have support for dual screen? (Intel has this, so it's certainly not an randr problem)

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    3,778

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SwedishPenguin View Post
    This is a big issue for me.
    Welcome to the club.

  8. #8

    Default

    Well, I guess I will return my HD4670 and get an Nvidia equivlent. If someone from AMD/ATI is reading this forum: you lost another sale, fess up and at the very least provide drivers for stable Xorg and kernel releases. How hard can it be? Does the API really change that much between releases? Nvidia can obviously keep up.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    311

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SwedishPenguin View Post
    Well, I guess I will return my HD4670 and get an Nvidia equivlent. If someone from AMD/ATI is reading this forum: you lost another sale, fess up and at the very least provide drivers for stable Xorg and kernel releases. How hard can it be? Does the API really change that much between releases? Nvidia can obviously keep up.
    Yes. The API does break does change in driver relevant ways.

    NV effectively moved away from all common X code and the resultant invasive binary replacement of things like libglx. So yes, they get it easier due to less interfaces that need to be kept in sync.

    ATI (or at least when I was there) had a less-invasive driver, but was more prone to break X release to X release since it was exposed to XAA/DRI/GLX, etc and there was lots of changes happening with them.

    The end result is that ATI has to move away from the standard interfaces (much the same as NV), but will be more invasive on install. Difficult choice, but that's where it sits.

    IIRC, the last 3 releases of Xorg broke ABI compatibility with GLX, DRI and I think some core X functions. That's the price for "Innovation".

    Matthew

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,926

    Default

    As I understand it, the OSS driver doesn't support 3D or deliver 3D features.
    Dude, you're stuck in 2008.

    The free drivers are not perfect yet, but they provide OpenGL 2.0 on everything up to the HD 4xxx family. Only the latest 5xxx cards are still not supported.

    "3D: in development": you know what that means, right?
    I've been running these drivers for half a year and I assure you that I know that that means.

    That means that everything I need works, including many games. I'm not much of a gamer, and there are games that still don't run well, but there is definitely working 3D, and it's more stable for me than nVidia's blob has ever been.

    Anyway, the point is, 3D is an ongoing progression and it sounds like power saving is a major problem, too.
    3D is an ongoing progression in the sense that not everything from the OpenGL 3.x spec is implemented. Most of the GL2 spec (which is what the vast majority of everything running on Linux actually uses) works great.

    Power saving is a major issue. There is a load-based implementation available as a patch, but it will take a while before it becomes mainstream.

    But that's really the last thing that the free drivers are missing.

    Please don't spread FUD.
    Last edited by pingufunkybeat; 01-14-2010 at 09:51 AM.

Posting Permissions

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