Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Radeon Driver Enables Full 2D Acceleration For HD 7000

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

  • Radeon Driver Enables Full 2D Acceleration For HD 7000

    Phoronix: Radeon Driver Enables Full 2D Acceleration For HD 7000

    A commit to the xf86-video-ati driver this morning by AMD's Michel Dänzer says it enables full 2D acceleration for the Radeon HD 7000 "Southern Islands" GPUs...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTI2MjY

  • #2
    Thanks for heads-up Michael!

    The wait is justified, everyone knows how GCN is different. What is not justified are still low performance (yes, even now) and bad power profiling... Even 260 gtx + proprietary nvidia is faster, than a raw 3x faster 6870 card when comboed with opensource drivers.

    If anyone can practically implement them, he is welcome to setup a kickstarter project with a few thousands bucks as a thanks. I am more than sure, the radeon users will help out.

    If you are not hot at moneymaking by selling cards via means of a good driver,.. don't forget that option, guys.

    Comment


    • #3
      Its time for new series of 2D comparisions between AMD Catalys/MESA+xorg+drm drivers

      PS do we have ONE name for calling graphic drivers for Linux that use FLOSS components?

      (AMD have Catalys but for FLOSS they have r600/radeonSI/r300 etc... no unified name)

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by przemoli View Post
        Its time for new series of 2D comparisions between AMD Catalys/MESA+xorg+drm drivers

        PS do we have ONE name for calling graphic drivers for Linux that use FLOSS components?

        (AMD have Catalys but for FLOSS they have r600/radeonSI/r300 etc... no unified name)
        The fact is that phoronix readers can do that on their own...
        And everyone is calm and relies on Michael.........! See: http://phoronix.com/forums/showthrea...Test-using-PTS


        Regarding naming, the opensource driver has one name - its called "Radeon". The parts are different components/modules within kernel.

        Comment


        • #5
          6000 series still doesn't work

          Originally posted by phoronix View Post
          Phoronix: Radeon Driver Enables Full 2D Acceleration For HD 7000

          A commit to the xf86-video-ati driver this morning by AMD's Michel Dänzer says it enables full 2D acceleration for the Radeon HD 7000 "Southern Islands" GPUs...

          http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTI2MjY
          Not really sure what to find exciting about this while I still cannot use the open source drivers with the 6000 series on my laptop (HD 6620G + HD 6750M). The power management is so inexcusably bad that I am afraid it will melt the laptop. My next laptop is likely to be Intel based for obvious reasons. Does AMD care about free software?

          -ed.

          Comment


          • #6
            And muxless amd card still a dream under linux.........................
            Last amd device ever...

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
              Thanks for heads-up Michael!

              The wait is justified, everyone knows how GCN is different. What is not justified are still low performance (yes, even now) and bad power profiling... Even 260 gtx + proprietary nvidia is faster, than a raw 3x faster 6870 card when comboed with opensource drivers.

              If anyone can practically implement them, he is welcome to setup a kickstarter project with a few thousands bucks as a thanks. I am more than sure, the radeon users will help out.

              If you are not hot at moneymaking by selling cards via means of a good driver,.. don't forget that option, guys.
              The general idea in this community is that opensource will solve that all on it's own (it's free!!). I'm suprised that ppl are dissapointed by the lagging support for this hardware. And are asking to donate money/manpower.

              Proprietary software is being treated as it's the devil himself. Yet nVidia's driver is the best proof that proprietary works with opensource software.

              Comment


              • #8
                Great to see there is progress on the support of the new asics.
                However, does GLAMOR supports zaphod mode now?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Rexilion View Post
                  The general idea in this community is that opensource will solve that all on it's own (it's free!!). I'm suprised that ppl are dissapointed by the lagging support for this hardware. And are asking to donate money/manpower.

                  Proprietary software is being treated as it's the devil himself. Yet nVidia's driver is the best proof that proprietary works with opensource software.
                  Well, Intel graphics drivers on GNU/Linux are Free Software and has given by far the most trouble free user experience for me.

                  So. Free Software is beating proprietary software hands down here.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Rexilion View Post
                    Yet nVidia's driver is the best proof that proprietary works with opensource software.
                    It doesn't work with it, it works around it. NVIDIA simply has enough resources (and writes most of their code platform-independently) that they can afford reimplementing everything on their own. But the reimplementation is by no means always better - security issues, debugging problems, stability and maintenance are harmed by the fact that it's all proprietary. If NVIDIA suddenly decided not to release anything else for Linux ever, after a while Nouveau would become better than the proprietary driver in more or less all aspects.

                    Proprietary solutions are not the devil, but they are simply pointless obstacles. They create a lot of problems that could be avoided if at least a part of the driver was open-source. And the only reason why the drivers are proprietary is that their code either has some secrets they don't want to give to others, or it has licensed code from somewhere else. Both could easily be made into proprietary modules for OSS drivers, and nobody would complain about that, because the main part of the driver would still be in a position where it could be maintained and changed as the community, and not the company, decides. And that's very important in terms of new feature adoption and security issues.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by moilami View Post
                      Well, Intel graphics drivers on GNU/Linux are Free Software and has given by far the most trouble free user experience for me.

                      So. Free Software is beating proprietary software hands down here.
                      cool your jets hippie. intel drivers in windows are more capable AND faster than the linux ones.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by GreatEmerald View Post
                        It doesn't work with it, it works around it. NVIDIA simply has enough resources (and writes most of their code platform-independently) that they can afford reimplementing everything on their own. But the reimplementation is by no means always better - security issues, debugging problems, stability and maintenance are harmed by the fact that it's all proprietary. If NVIDIA suddenly decided not to release anything else for Linux ever, after a while Nouveau would become better than the proprietary driver in more or less all aspects.

                        Proprietary solutions are not the devil, but they are simply pointless obstacles. They create a lot of problems that could be avoided if at least a part of the driver was open-source. And the only reason why the drivers are proprietary is that their code either has some secrets they don't want to give to others, or it has licensed code from somewhere else. Both could easily be made into proprietary modules for OSS drivers, and nobody would complain about that, because the main part of the driver would still be in a position where it could be maintained and changed as the community, and not the company, decides. And that's very important in terms of new feature adoption and security issues.
                        That 'part of the driver should be opensource' is kind of moot: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?px=...page=news_item

                        It's partially opensource -> Ppl are still not happy.

                        Furthermore, yes opensource allows ppl like me to help out. For example, a hibernate bug that affected a lot of hardware: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=50121 (which I initially reported). So glad they have a patch right now. But I needed to:

                        - compile my own kernel
                        - boot and handle kernels (GRUB)
                        - handle GIT -> bisecting, remote branches, unbootable kernels
                        - handle patching
                        - report bugs upstream where many other ppl just 'dump' their own problems not even trying to figure out if it's the same issue!
                        - become acquinted with kernel peqularities like dmesg, (undocumented!) boot parameters

                        I could just have gone with:

                        <packagemanager> install nvidia-drivers

                        And be done with it. Furthermore, bugs can be reported to nvidia, the driver includes a dedicated script to aid in just doing that!

                        And as for nVidia's local root exploit, they are also in the linux kernel. Which is opensource. One of which, initially, went unnoticed... I tested that myself. As a normal user, executing the testcase gave me an instant root shell (wtf).
                        Last edited by Rexilion; 12-27-2012, 11:47 AM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Rexilion View Post
                          It's partially opensource -> Ppl are still not happy.
                          That's a separate case. The main uproar about it was that they promised to make it fully open-source in the announcement, and it appeared that it wasn't true. I'm pretty sure that there is nobody complaining that what got open-sourced is now open-source.

                          Originally posted by Rexilion View Post
                          But I needed to:

                          - compile my own kernel
                          - boot and handle kernels (GRUB)
                          - handle GIT -> bisecting, remote branches, unbootable kernels
                          - handle patching
                          - report bugs upstream where many other ppl just 'dump' their own problems not even trying to figure out if it's the same issue!
                          - become acquinted with kernel peqularities like dmesg, (undocumented!) boot parameters

                          I could just have gone with:

                          <packagemanager> install nvidia-drivers

                          And be done with it. Furthermore, bugs can be reported to nvidia, the driver includes a dedicated script to aid in just doing that!
                          Of course - but do realise that NVIDIA has to do the exact same thing when something is reported to them. So they have a lot less motivation to do so, and thus not all bugs get solved as fast.

                          Originally posted by Rexilion View Post
                          And as for nVidia's local root exploit, they are also in the linux kernel. Which is opensource. One of which, initially, went unnoticed... I tested that myself. As a normal user, executing the testcase gave me an instant root shell (wtf).
                          And again, of course, but the fact that it's open-source means that you can patch it yourself, and not wait for someone else to do so. That means it gets resolved much faster.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Rexilion View Post
                            The general idea in this community is that opensource will solve that all on it's own (it's free!!). I'm suprised that ppl are dissapointed by the lagging support for this hardware. And are asking to donate money/manpower.

                            Proprietary software is being treated as it's the devil himself. Yet nVidia's driver is the best proof that proprietary works with opensource software.
                            So, you happy with your nvidia driver? Cool. I am not. Now leave the thread and take your useless posts with you please.


                            @GreatEmerald & Co: please do not waste your time on pointless speeches.
                            This guy apparently has no idea.

                            + Nvidia driver works, it is best proprietary supported driver and it brought 3D to Linux.
                            - But its closed source and conflicts with GPL libre license, written ONLY for corporate customers with minor adaptations to fit general audiency, it lacks features compared to windows driver, it does not use advantages of Linux kernel, it is pain in butt to integrate (and Linux is designed this way for a reason). And when nvidia says its over, its over; when nvidia says - you don't get this functionality - you don't get it.

                            This is not case with open drivers. Open drivers are free for everybody to improve and extent. And hell yes, a lot of people are ready to pay for them. If you are not - pick other thread to troll, because your arguments are of no use.

                            Like I said more than year before: Good hardware, good driver or open driver - pick any two of three. Intel, AMD and Nvidia accordingly.
                            If AMD really understood the situation, they would punch a million dollar development into open driver. But they did not. This is what I HATE about AMD. They were dumb enough to ignore GPU opensource and they are now dumb enough to improve catalyst instead of opensource. But I don't work for them.

                            Yet, they do not constitute monopoly; they didn't invent HDCP and UEFI - they worked on coreboot instead; and their GPU hardware is very good, and CPUs are sweetly priced and support ECC on desktops.
                            If I were to pick, I would choose between AMD and Intel, because those companies actually did something to opensource, whilst having own drawbacks of course.
                            If you are happy with nvidia driver - go use it, no one will say a word. You can return, but when you happiness is over (if at all) any time though.
                            Last edited by crazycheese; 12-27-2012, 01:56 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Rexilion View Post
                              That 'part of the driver should be opensource' is kind of moot: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?px=...page=news_item

                              It's partially opensource -> Ppl are still not happy.
                              Sorry, but your example - the Raspberry driver, was not "partially opensource". They simply took the whole closed driver stack and stuffed it behind a blackbox layer, while punching hole interfaces and declaring them as open. That is not partially opensource. That is simply fraud.

                              Opensource radeon driver, for example, needs to load a small closed source firmware blob, in order to drive the GPU.
                              This was simply the hardware decision for microcode handling and big majority of people are ok with it, because its strictly hardware related and in no way limiting the use, support cases or OS compatibility. And it can be rev'd if there is need (but there is no currently).
                              Raspberry on the other side - has implemented whole logic in closed source black box. Thats not opensource.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X