Page 11 of 25 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 243

Thread: AMD To Drop Radeon HD 2000/3000/4000 Catalyst Support

  1. #101
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    517

    Default

    All I see is this:

    AMD has
    - committed money to develop OSS drivers and released partial specifications of some of their chipsets for the community to work on
    - committed themselves to develop OSS drivers
    - a subpar OSS driver which falls behind the reverse-engineered Nouveau driver

    NVIDIA has
    - openly commented that they wil never touch OSS drivers

    and AMD gets all the hate just because of one bolded point.


    To quote one person who made this statement in the forum somewhere in the early pages:

    Release the specifications and the community will do the rest
    Wake up your bloody idea; AMD is doing just that. And where have the community gone? Most have hauled their sorry butt off to Nouveau and left AMD to handle the OSS driver development themselves with a tiny bunch of X developers. Look at the news postings on the website: all the effort is now on? Nouveau. Nouveau. Nouveau.

    This is irrefutable proof that the OSS community whining for 'OSS drivers' are nothing but a bunch of hypocrites who only know how to TALK TALK TALK TALK TALK AND MAKE EMPTY PROMISES. The community 'will do the rest'? What a load of baldfaced LIES. Don't ever make that statement again, because you SURE ARE HELL have no intention to do so.

    You want a PROPER working OSS Radeon driver? Write it YOURSELF. If you can't you have 0 right to bitch about the state of the Radeon driver.

    AMD should never have opened up their drivers if this is the response they are going to get.

    PS: Kudos to the devs who actually continued giving their all in the OSS Radeon driver development even after AMD released the partial specifications.

  2. #102
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    117

    Default

    I'm rather glad to see this happening. Radeon works great on my Mobility HD3650, where fglrx falls flat (with regards to stability). Hopefully this will lead to more community involvement with the open source radeon driver. Wish I had the knowledge and experience to even help with it myself, too.

  3. #103
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    108

    Default

    I had used ATI in Linux for 10 years. It has given me a lot of problems. I had already lost their support in my last x1250. Now, I am who drop AMD/ATI support. I'm now a happy user of Nvidia (GT430):
    http://phoronix.com/forums/showthrea...-Linux/page10&

    Works great with Nouveau + Gallium3D and with the proprietary drivers.

  4. #104
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Merida
    Posts
    1,099

    Default

    Well this sucks a bit. Not really an issue for my laptop (RS480) since there fglrx stopped working a long time ago and the open source driver works alright (canīt game on it anymore, which is a shame). Shame for my desktopīs HD4850 though; that card still plays every new game under Windows and a lot of games under Linux (native, WINE, emulators). Donīt really use XvBA, but it is nice to have. Hell, fglrx even lets me overclock for extra performance. Good power management will also be missed. The open source driver is not that bad with that card and it can only get better.

  5. #105
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Vilnius, Lithuania
    Posts
    2,517

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kivada View Post
    You may have missed the memo that by 2013 the market is supposed to be flooded by 15~21" LCDs at 3840x2160. You're HD4890 can't even produce a 2D desktop at that resolution. Intel Ivy Bridge will support an output of 4096x4096 and the AMD HD6000 series already supports 16000x16000. They won't run Unigine Heaven at frames per second though...

    Sure... Now if you read that article carefully, you'd see that it won't realistically happen for quite a while. Not to mention that unlike with internal PC components, replacing the external ones (keyboard, mouse, headset, monitor) usually only happens when the old ones break down - there is hardly any development going in those fields to warrant a change. So even if there were super high resolution displays on the market, people wouldn't switch to them and then buy new cards because of it. The opposite is a bit more realistic - if you have a card that can handle super high resolution, you might buy a display with it, but even then only when your current one breaks down.

    Plus, I wouldn't switch to anything higher than 1080p because of the processor once again. Of course, in my case it's somewhat special, since I record 1080p videos, but still - anything more would be impossible to record fluidly with current CPUs, not to mention the increased storage amount that would be needed for that, and the necessity for increased network speed.

    On the up side, though, those displays would act as a sort of natural supersampling, which is pretty neat as it could make AA less important (if at all).

    Quote Originally Posted by Kivada View Post
    First off, Holy text block Batman!
    See, on my 1080p display, that giant text block is merely a few lines :P

  6. #106
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    8

    Exclamation

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonadow View Post
    All I see is this:

    AMD has
    - committed money to develop OSS drivers and released partial specifications of some of their chipsets for the community to work on
    - committed themselves to develop OSS drivers
    - a subpar OSS driver which falls behind the reverse-engineered Nouveau driver

    NVIDIA has
    - openly commented that they wil never touch OSS drivers

    and AMD gets all the hate just because of one bolded point.


    To quote one person who made this statement in the forum somewhere in the early pages:



    Wake up your bloody idea; AMD is doing just that. And where have the community gone? Most have hauled their sorry butt off to Nouveau and left AMD to handle the OSS driver development themselves with a tiny bunch of X developers. Look at the news postings on the website: all the effort is now on? Nouveau. Nouveau. Nouveau.

    This is irrefutable proof that the OSS community whining for 'OSS drivers' are nothing but a bunch of hypocrites who only know how to TALK TALK TALK TALK TALK AND MAKE EMPTY PROMISES. The community 'will do the rest'? What a load of baldfaced LIES. Don't ever make that statement again, because you SURE ARE HELL have no intention to do so.

    You want a PROPER working OSS Radeon driver? Write it YOURSELF. If you can't you have 0 right to bitch about the state of the Radeon driver.

    AMD should never have opened up their drivers if this is the response they are going to get.

    PS: Kudos to the devs who actually continued giving their all in the OSS Radeon driver development even after AMD released the partial specifications.
    Well put, nvidia is laughing all the way to the bank.
    They don't have to lift one finger to help the OSS guys, and yet people are 'going green' because there will be no binary blobs for older hardware, but AMD still has tech docs out which is much more than what nvidia has EVER done.

    And now most clowns in this thread crying the sky is falling are going to "punish" AMD/ATI by buying nvidia gear because AMD/ATI have the gall to release tech docs to help OSS driver guys, and nvidia hasn't.

    Yeah, smart move there!

    Michael Larabel should point out the reasons why the OSS nvidia driver is better than the OSS AMD driver, and how are they getting better results with no tech docs releases from nvidia, compared to what AMD has released. Is it a only a manpower issue, or is there more to this ?

  7. #107

    Default

    @GreatEmerald

    Fisrt, most people that are the target market for super high res screens are the high end gamer market, wo upgrade their GPU every year-18 months, they moved from their HD6950s that they BIOS modded into HD6970s to HD7970s already, when high res screens hit they'll be waiting for the first model to hit some magic level of low latency to replace their 1920x1200 or 2560x1600 res screen or screens.

    The general consumer will be roped in with QFHD HDTV brought to you only via Bluray+ as the US internet infrastructure couldn't possibly handle transferring that kind of video as none of the ISPs want to upgrade, ever and the fact that the movie studios are drooling at the opportunity to offer another media standard that you have to pay $30 a movie for. Think about how they sold HDTV and the 3D HDTV to the general public, with most of the gear sold not being able to possibly handle 1920x1080.

    Furthermore, you CPU make very little difference at very high resolution and GPU settings, if you are quadrupling 1920x1080 as would be the case in 3840x2160, a jump from 2,073,600 pixels to 8,294,400 pixels. You see it here all the tie with Larabel stupidly using IOQuake3 based games on modern hardware like i7s and GTX580s, the the limiting factor with games with such low hardware requirements show that the CPU ends up being the limiting factor, now though, if you look at a really high GPU intensity game you quickly find that the CPU is no longer the limiting factor as you increase the resolution and graphics settings, if you max out a game like Metro 2033's GPU settings at 2560x1600 the GPU hit's it's limitations long before the CPU hit's it's capability to keep feeding the GPU up to date location data for everything on the stage that you're on. Increasing the resolution only makes the GPU cry uncle that much faster as the work the CPU has to do doesn't change much between 640x480 and 2560x1600.

    Yeah, thats par of the reason to move to higher resolution screens, no more need for AA, AF you still might need to give things in the distance a sense of depth, but even your 2D experience becomes allot better as fonts will be much crisper and easier to read at very high pixel densities.

    Yeah, I'm on 1600x1200 at 15" or 133PPI. but I'm currently sitting 4-5 feet back from the screen, so I have the site zoomed so I don't have to squint.
    Last edited by Kivada; 04-21-2012 at 04:09 PM.

  8. #108

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vortex View Post
    Michael Larabel should point out the reasons why the OSS nvidia driver is better than the OSS AMD driver, and how are they getting better results with no tech docs releases from nvidia, compared to what AMD has released. Is it a only a manpower issue, or is there more to this ?
    Uhuh, while I'm no driver dev what I do know of the Gallium3D drivers is that the Intel, AMD and Gallium3D devs are doing all the heavy lifting of actually implementing all the features in the stack via state trackers, the Nouveau guys then just have to figure out how to make their driver spit out the same thing the Nvidia blob does when given the same OpenGL command as the Gallium3D drivers would be giving. Which allot less work then where Nouveau started before they moved to the Gallium3D stack where they had to do pretty much everything themselves.

    Lets also not forget Linux's large installed base of Nvidia users because for most of the decade their cards where the only ones that worked to actually game as your choices where Intel garbage or getting an R200 based Radeon card.

    These days these people are now zealots because they have a psychologically vested interest even though the only thing Nvidia has ever done for them is provide VDPAU as a way to keep them from switching to AMD.

    I'm not against Nvidia, I'm just pro open source, I actually wanted Nvidia to merge with VIA and produce their own X86-64 APUs like AMD is doing as it'd be better for the market as a whole to have 3 major players in the x86 game and keep Intel on it's toes, if they had done so in 2008 by now they'd by now have enough time to cook up a pretty good low-mid range system based around a midrange GPU, their own Chipset and an updated version of the Nano, sure they probably wouldn't work on Linux all that well given the history of both Nvidia and VIA/S3 but on Windows they'd be pretty good.

  9. #109
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    429

    Default For what it's worth...

    Quote Originally Posted by RealNC View Post
    Something that works.
    I've just bought a HD6450, and its OSS drivers run World of Warcraft "out of the box" on Fedora 16. Once I'd installed libtxc_dxtn.so, anyway. Fedora 16 uses Mesa 7.11.2, and its very playable.

  10. #110
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Istanbul
    Posts
    134

    Default

    Here is the another thread about open source GPUs for Linux. Looks like nVidia doing best in this job, even without supporting open source directly, like AMD.

    http://www.reddit.com/r/linux/commen...rformance_with

    I am thinking on it for a while. Why AMD needed to support open source on Linux OSs?
    Why they hired programmers ( 2 programmers! Laughs! ) for producing codes for many different GPUs?

    I think, probably, they feel that, they are really behind of other brands and gonna loose their share between linux users...
    So they wanted to "look like" Linux compatible and put their weight on FOSS drivers. Opened specs etc. They made solid improvements. Made good steps. Thanks for that.
    But they look like they forget about being "behind" and the gap doesn't gonna close with hiring just two developers.
    They need MUCH more developer to support their GPUs... Dropping catalyst support for old cards? No problem If they are gonna spend maintain money for FOSS drivers... Also gonna happy about it.

    AMD is better to hire 10 more FOSS developer and drop whole catalyst support for linux!
    Do you agreed?

Posting Permissions

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