AMD Catalyst For Linux On The "Blacklist Of Junk"

**gururise** · 09-06-2012, 03:34 PM

Well, fglrx works better in Wine than the opensource Intel drivers in at least one game I've tested.

Example:

Battlefield 2:

On Intel (HD4000), I cannot enable lighting effects without crashing wine, and the gamma in the game is messed up.
On FGLRX (ATI4670), I can set all options to full settings, and the game plays perfectly.

**necro-lover** · 09-06-2012, 03:56 PM

The catalyst is on my personal "Blacklist" to
I will never touch the catalyst again and i will never buy a product who force me to use the "catalyst" again.
'AMD' taught me this circumstance 5 years in a round with a baton beating it on my head.

in my point of view these 'closed source' people @amd do have a brain damange.

**markg85** · 09-06-2012, 03:59 PM

This article was really funny to read

**efikkan** · 09-06-2012, 04:18 PM

Originally Posted by blackiwid

just dont say such stupid stuff. you absolutate speed and feature set, thats retarded. there is more than this 2 categories out there.

No matter how wrong or right I might be, that is no way to talk to a human being.

Originally Posted by blackiwid

So if you are a developer of a opengl 4.0 game or something yes you will stick this other drivers that do not work for you at all on this list. but thats not the only point how you can judge a driver.

They are more way more stable₁ than the closed ones and they are free₂, and they are fast enough for 3d desktop₃. So for all people who not want to play under linux because there are anyway no high grafics opensource games, and even this source-engin2 games are that crappy 10 year old grafics quality that it will even run with the intel-igps...₄

so yes for commercial game developers you can maybe if you make really high quality (graphics wise) games blacklist this drivers, but for the 99% of the other people you cant.

It astonishes me time after time how little some people know about a certain thing or subject, and still would almost put their reputation on the line for that cause.

If you read my post again, I mentioned the Intel drivers for Linux might be ok for some usage.

1) In most cases untrue, except for non-GLSL pre OpenGL 3.x where the Intel drivers is generally more stable than the others except Nvidia(P).
2) A common mistake, some drivers are free, some have a degree of freedom. The "free" Radeon drivers still uses proprietary firmware.
3) A "3D desktop" should not be any stress for any recent card, but it is nice to have some proper power adjustment and efficiency. Nvidia(P) is very good here, Fglrx is mediocre but not terrible, Radeon/Nouveau is bad.
4) Many Linux users want to play games, Wine works ok for many games.

I would claim 95-98% of the users would benefit from Nvidias proprietary drivers. Some benefits:
* Best stability, with LTS drivers for Ubuntu!
* Best OpenGL and OpenCL support.
* Best video acceleration.
* Very good power management.
* Support for high quality antialiasing (32X CSAA for GeForce, 64x for Quadro).
* Support for stereoscopy (for those who care about that...).
* CUDA Support (BTW The CUDA complier is open source now).
For artists:
* Support for 10-pit per color, both DVI and DP, the Linux driver has more options than the Windows driver

For programmers:
* Access to the largest selection of OpenGL extensions, giving a taste for future specifications.

Nvidia is still not perfect.

And BTW, Nvidia uses open protocols, as well is CUDA, Nvidias configuration and installer

**Kano** · 09-06-2012, 04:39 PM

@gururise

It would be very bad when wine would not work a tiny bit better with fglrx compared to intel

On your gfx card glxinfo should be more differnt when called wine.

**bridgman** · 09-06-2012, 05:00 PM