Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMD's Legacy Driver Will Not Support X Server 1.6

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    There's a lot of clueless whiners in this topic.


    I've got a R300 sitting around somewhere (which just about still works - hardware fault). Is there anything I can help with?

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Hephasteus View Post
      It's a hard balance between being wasteful and being excessively attached to old hardware. The hardware I was talking about was neices computer. It's a HP with built in radeon 2000 graphics and a 3.2 ghz prescott pentium 4 that bounces all over the place on it's operating frequency making a potentially fast and good computer a train wreck with stalling video and jerky mouse.

      People need to stop letting companies integrate horrible graphics into systems. When ati was integrating 1000 graphics into computers they should have been integrating 2000 graphics into them. When they were integrating 2000 graphics into systems they should have been integrating 3000 graphics into systems. Here we are today with 880G supposedly being the hot integrated graphics platform of this year. Who knows what nvidia will respond to this with. It's basically a radeon 3450 chip integrated in. It should be a radeon 4550 chip integrated. Once this game gets into the cpu market they are going to be integrating the stupidest worst architectures they can to make your cpu worthless as soon as they possibly can.

      The system has to shrink and you can bet it's going to shrink down into the most obsoletable form that people can tolerate.

      But as people have said the 1000 doesn't have any capabilities. Pretending it does and warranting a place for in the evolution of X and all the graphical layers it needs to be to get where it needs to go is rediculous. If the open source driver can show a desktop and handle 2d then so be it. Trying to do 3d with it at modern resolutions doesn't work and isn't worth the effort to try. Personally I think they should dump 2000 also and move forward with shader 4.0 progress.
      OK, I think I see where the confusion is coming from here. If you're running with a P4 then you don't have Radeon 2000 graphics, you probably have a Radeon 200M aka RS400. That is a cut-down X300 with two pipes (vs four pipes on X300) and is *really* slow compared to more recent ATI graphics.

      The closest thing to "radeon 2000 graphics" in an IGP would be the "Radeon 2100 graphics" in an rs740, an enhanced rs690.

      The GPU in an rs780 IGP ("Radeon 3100/3200/3300 graphics") is maybe 4 times as fast as your Xpress 200, with maybe 8 times the shader power.
      Last edited by bridgman; 03-06-2009, 02:07 PM.

      Comment


      • #48
        Interesting note. We gripe (well, I know I certainly do) about the lack of supported features in Linux that Windows enjoys. But I do understand about dropping support for legacy hardware.

        In Windows we have patches and service packs that do rewrite kernel level code (XP SP2!) but it is not the same as versions of Linux kernel or X Server versions. To ask AMD/ATI to do so is not good business practices on their part.How much of an unknowing future are they expected to support?

        What I will agree is needed...AMD/ATI needs to have drivers that fully exploit the features as listed on their marketing and on their boxes. To not do so, and then drop support to leagacy is false advertising. So if this means they have drawn a line in the sand and said from here we drop to legacy and here we begin our new attack on fully featured drivers, then more power to them and I wish them the best.



        On a side note, I got tired of waiting. I went ahead and bought the nVidia ASUS EN8400GS (512M) which offered a $10 rebate ($29). I will be working on the HTPC and Mythbuntu/Boxee in the coming weeks, disabling the onboard RS790GX. Sorry, I could no longer wait. I did that with the RS690.

        Comment


        • #49
          Hello, I just read on an italian news site that AMD will supply legacy driver updates for <R600 cards every 3 months on Windows, so support won't be entirely discontinued.
          Will this happen also on linux? (mind there's a RIGHT answer and a WRONG answer here :P )

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by bridgman View Post
            OK, I think I see where the confusion is coming from here. If you're running with a P4 then you don't have Radeon 2000 graphics, you probably have a Radeon 200M aka RS400. That is a cut-down X300 with two pipes (vs four pipes on X300) and is *really* slow compared to more recent ATI graphics.

            The closest thing to "radeon 2000 graphics" in an IGP would be the "Radeon 2100 graphics" in an rs740, an enhanced rs690.

            The GPU in an rs780 IGP ("Radeon 3100/3200/3300 graphics") is maybe 4 times as fast as your Xpress 200, with maybe 8 times the shader power.
            OH ya you are right it's called Xpress 200. It is 2 rops but it's not mine. Basically anything listed on integrated graphics below the radeon hd 3200 on amd's driver list should go from support and basic spinoff driver should be put out so x and everything running can just say you don't have the hardware to run this when you try to run 3d things.

            More recent ati graphics in integrated department are "REALLY SLOW" as well as from nvidia and via. As I said the first cpu's that have onboard gpu's are likely to get a big WTF? from everyone as the industry has been spoiled beyond all corruption into being allowed to make low bar planned obsolescence changes to facilitate margin spreading on the middle and upper end.

            Comment


            • #51
              The 780 and up should be decently fast - low end gaming only, of course, but fast enough for everything else. The problem with most IGP products is that the graphics requirements are usually "the very best graphics possible for no more than a couple of dollars" ;(

              We would probably sell a lot more 3450s if we didn't have the same graphics in a 780

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by ethana2 View Post
                More than nVidia ever did for us; Quit yer yappin'
                I beg to differ. nVidia has consistantly provided quality binary drivers for many, many years. They also continue to update legacy drivers to ensure that users with old (oooold) hardware can use new software.

                I cannot understand people who continually try to stand up for ATi when they really haven't done a whole lot for the linux community.

                They're provided crappy binary drivers and they've released just enough documentation to make subpar open source drivers for their hardware that won't allow it to be used to anywhere near full potential.

                I'm sure I come across as an nvidia fanboy on this site because I'm always singing their praises and knocking ATi. In truth I'm just a long-time linux user who has used a variety of cards from both brands (or tried to, in ATi's case). If I was a windows user I might very well advocate ATi cards.

                I should also mention I completely gave up on ATi about a year ago. Maybe their drivers have improved since then. At that time, however, there was absolutely no, none, zero, zilch, comparison to be made between nVidia and ATi. Anyone advocating ATi over nVidia for linux gaming or multimedia should, quite honestly, be ashamed of themselves.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by psycho_driver View Post
                  ...and they've released just enough documentation to make subpar open source drivers for their hardware that won't allow it to be used to anywhere near full potential.
                  I'm sorry, but that is just patently false. We have released enough technical information to let an equally sophisticated driver stack run 100% as fast as fglrx or the Windows driver (barring OS differences). The point is that writing an equally sophisticated 3D stack to match fglrx would require more developer effort than the entire Xorg community combined, and none of the developers I have spoken with feel that level of effort is necessary.

                  A clean, well-written driver of perhaps 1/10th the size and complexity of fglrx (say a straightforward Gallium3D driver, running over a decent memory manager and a carefully tweaked command submission backend) should be able to average 60-70% of fglrx performance across a broad range of apps, with 5-10% of the developer effort. That is what I expect will get implemented, but it's just a guess.

                  If you want to get 20 or 30 full time developers together for a couple of years and aim for 100% of fglrx performance, the programming information you need is available and we will cheerfully support your efforts. I'm not sure if it would be practical to start with Mesa+Gallium or if you would be better off starting from scratch, but we should know in the next six months.

                  Originally posted by psycho_driver View Post
                  I should also mention I completely gave up on ATi about a year ago. Maybe their drivers have improved since then. At that time, however, there was absolutely no, none, zero, zilch, comparison to be made between nVidia and ATi. Anyone advocating ATi over nVidia for linux gaming or multimedia should, quite honestly, be ashamed of themselves.
                  Yeah, that was about the time we started putting the first consumer-related improvements into the driver.
                  Last edited by bridgman; 03-06-2009, 07:07 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    I posted this in the, "AMD Dropping R300-R500 Support", thread but I figure I'll cast a wide net and repost it here:

                    I don't use fglrx for my Radeon 9550 but I've found that I have to install it, if only briefly, to get any acceleration with any WINE-based products.

                    Once I've installed fglrx, I can then remove it and go back to the xorg-video-ati driver, retaining acceleration in WINE/Cedega but if I can't even install it, come Ubuntu 9.04, the usefulness of my PC is going to be severely hampered.

                    Anyone else experienced this bug and know a way around it that doesn't involve installing and uninstalling fglrx?

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      This is interesting. Do you fully uninstall fglrx before switching back to the open driver, or do you think you are leaving one of the files that fglrx over-writes in place ?

                      Does the effect survive a reboot ? In other words, do we think this is from fglrx writing registers or changing files ?

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Define &quot;Quality.&quot;

                        Originally posted by psycho_driver View Post
                        I beg to differ. nVidia has consistantly provided quality binary drivers for many, many years.
                        Personally, I'm going to have to beg to differ too. The other way. fglrx has problems; I don't think anyone's going to deny that. To be sure, I had a devil of a time getting it working the first time. nvidia wins that one. But you know, I've had several orders of magnitude more issues with nvidia's terrible driver than ati's terrible driver.

                        It's one thing to install easily; it's an entirely different matter to be rock-stable for six months at a time. How often should I get an oops because my display driver inexplicably decided that it was a great time to deref NULL while I was taking a simple note in my text editor? It's never happened with fglrx. How often should an app start creating strange green corruptions all over the screen and then kernel oops? So much for "good legacy driver support." Why has performance in nvidia's driver been getting worse with this 6600 since the 180-series drivers hit? Why did it stop properly controlling the fan? Or the recent drivers that seemed to enjoy ignoring signals: I didn't even think drivers could cause that sort of problem! And don't even get me started on the ugly, ugly hack that is Twinview.

                        There may have been a time where your synopsis was correct. That time is no longer the present.

                        If we can't defend ATi and AMD for teaching us to fish, please don't defend nVidia for giving us a rotten cod.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by bridgman View Post
                          This is interesting. Do you fully uninstall fglrx before switching back to the open driver, or do you think you are leaving one of the files that fglrx over-writes in place ?

                          Does the effect survive a reboot ? In other words, do we think this is from fglrx writing registers or changing files ?
                          I install fglrx, Catalyst and the one or two other packages fglrx demands as dependencies via apt and I apt-get purge them out of there. I also restore my pre-aticonf'd xorg.conf and have tried reinstalling the xorg-video-ati package just for the hell of it.

                          In the past I've usually left fglrx installed and in-use until something goes wrong (with 8.10 I think I left fglrx installed for about a month before I experimented with a dual-head setup and Catalyst refused to give me my native resolution back after I gave up on my dual-monitor aspirations).

                          So far I've found no other way to get WINE/Cedega/etc working properly (I use that term loosely) and I've found no way to re-break it, either. Going back to the open-source driver incurs a slight performance drop/few missing graphic operations but OpenGL/Direct3D in WINE retains the acceleration I'm unable to get on a fresh, pre-fglrx'ing install.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X