Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Catalyst 10.1 and Xorg 7.5 / 1.7.x?

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

  • 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
    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.

    Comment


    • #3
      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.

      Comment


      • #4
        Ubuntu will be on Xserver 1.8.

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

        Comment


        • #5
          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

          Comment


          • #6
            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)

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by SwedishPenguin View Post
              This is a big issue for me.
              Welcome to the club.

              Comment


              • #8
                Same old story, it seems. I asked about ATI and which cards should be considered for a certain price and speculate about driver maturity.

                But, it seems like it's too difficult to update and keep up. It seems the kernel and xorg are constantly being updated/upgraded and at a faster pace than usual. If I'm wrong, okay, but that is my impression. Nvidia seems to do a much better job at keeping up even if they have their own issues. Even if it's a constant offering of beta drivers, there is some usability that I don't perceive ATI having.

                It's not as big a deal if you have a desktop card but you might be a bit frustrated if you just bought one. But, with laptop cards, it's a major issue since there is no switching. Whether it's an older card that may or may not have OSS support being fully supported and no fglrx choice at all or a brand new card with mixed support, it still means waiting for sufficient improvement.

                Comment


                • #9
                  yes if you want the newest packages the FGLRX hurts you every year and day,,,,
                  don't buy AMD if you need the latest packages with the FGLRX...

                  Buy AMD for the open-source driver!...


                  WINE is the only reall point left for the FGLRX,,,

                  if the opensource driver get opengL3.2 the wine problem will be fixed...

                  fixed means delete FGRLX out of your harddrive and dring a good Whisky to delete the irritation with the name FGLRX from your brain to...

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
                    yes if you want the newest packages the FGLRX hurts you every year and day,,,,
                    don't buy AMD if you need the latest packages with the FGLRX...

                    Buy AMD for the open-source driver!...


                    WINE is the only reall point left for the FGLRX,,,

                    if the opensource driver get opengL3.2 the wine problem will be fixed...

                    fixed means delete FGRLX out of your harddrive and dring a good Whisky to delete the irritation with the name FGLRX from your brain to...
                    As I understand it, the OSS driver doesn't support 3D or deliver 3D features. Until it does, there will be a need to use fglrx so why keep harping on ONLY using the OSS driver. It's not practical when 3D is a large part of every OS. You couldn't even use Google Earth, I suspect.

                    Furthermore, the OSS driver is not usable in the latest cards either, I suspect. At least, not fully working. So, you have an incomplete driver set no matter the driver. I think that is what the complaints are about and not keeping up with the changes in X.org or the kernel. The fact that support for older cards is either discontinued or neglected is yet another whammy. If AMD/ATI want to distinguish themselves from Nvidia, they should have long term support instead of just concentrating on newer cards which is not being maintained in an up-to-date fashion anyway. AMD should probably devote more resources to it? One of the flaws in Linux, imho, as far as having more adoptions is video drivers. They are either requiring a really extensive driver install which is DIY or the support is way behind.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Panix View Post
                      As I understand it, the OSS driver doesn't support 3D or deliver 3D features.
                      thats totally wrong!

                      the Radeon+Mesa7.8 delivers openGL2.0+some OpenGL3.2 features.





                      Originally posted by Panix View Post
                      Until it does, there will be a need to use fglrx so why keep harping on ONLY using the OSS driver. It's not practical when 3D is a large part of every OS. You couldn't even use Google Earth, I suspect.
                      google Earth runs on mesa7.7! and mesa7.8!



                      Originally posted by Panix View Post
                      Furthermore, the OSS driver is not usable in the latest cards either,
                      thats true r600/R700 is supportet R800 is not...

                      so you can buy a up to a hd4870

                      but the the future the R800 is also supportet...



                      Originally posted by Panix View Post
                      I suspect. At least, not fully working. So, you have an incomplete driver set no matter the driver. I think that is what the complaints are about and not keeping up with the changes in X.org or the kernel. The fact that support for older cards is either discontinued or neglected is yet another whammy. If AMD/ATI want to distinguish themselves from Nvidia, they should have long term support instead of just concentrating on newer cards which is not being maintained in an up-to-date fashion anyway. AMD should probably devote more resources to it? One of the flaws in Linux, imho, as far as having more adoptions is video drivers. They are either requiring a really extensive driver install which is DIY or the support is way behind.
                      yes ... but they do it! on the opensource driver side! ..

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
                        Buy AMD for the open-source driver!...

                        WINE is the only reall point left for the FGLRX
                        IMO, power management is the only thing missing from the OSS drivers. If I operate my 4870 with the open drivers, it sits there and fries. You could cook hamburgers on it.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by RealNC View Post
                          IMO, power management is the only thing missing from the OSS drivers. If I operate my 4870 with the open drivers, it sits there and fries. You could cook hamburgers on it.
                          Ha! Same graphics card, same problem. And since the fglrx doesn't support my 3-month old xorg version yet -- it actually literal cooks itself to death. Luckily it's under warranty. Guess I'm giving them a business case to provide modern drivers (in a roundabout way ;D)

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            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.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
                              thats totally wrong!
                              How is it *totally* wrong?

                              This is from the 'Radeon' site:

                              http://www.x.org/wiki/radeon

                              R600/R700 class chips (Radeon HD 2300 – Radeon HD 4890):

                              * 2D: accelerated (EXA), stable
                              XVideo: accelerated and tear free, stable
                              3D: in development at mesa git (r600 driver) and Linux kernel. Mesa 7.7 release will have basic 3D support for r600/r700. Older instructions for usage at radeonhd:experimental_3D

                              http://www.x.org/wiki/RadeonFeature

                              "3D: in development": you know what that means, right?

                              Anyway, the point is, 3D is an ongoing progression and it sounds like power saving is a major problem, too. Many of the R600+ cards (the Evergreens do better) can get quite hot and have relatively high power consumption. If the driver fails to keep them cool and you need to buy an aftermarket fan but then you have to worry about whether you have software for that, it can be quite frustrating as you can see. When I am shopping for a card, those are important factors, at least for me. Performance and stability notwithstanding.

                              It is quite problematic if you have two choices of drivers but various problems associated with both. Then, if the card is older, you are looking at being restricted to only one choice (OSS). The newer cards have problems with fglrx and I have read that distros such as Fedora 12 and latest sidux don't even offer support for the latest fglrx driver as it can't even be used with latest X.org yet. So, you buy a new $200+ card and can't even use it and don' know when you can? That's a concern, huh?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X