who cares about Catalyst
So ok gamers who play under linux state of the art games like ähh what was the last doom3? would care about a catalyst driver ok that I can understand I can maybe also understand when somebody heavily uses Wine to play under linux, but that can not be the majority. So anybody else would rather use the stable portable automatic easy installable compatible better opensource driver.
So yes AMD have problems with linux, but thats primary because they dont focus on the free driver. its better for 90% of the users, so why not heavily focus on making it better instead I read something about the crappy Catalyst. If I want somewhat stable gaming-fast linux graphics card I naturaly go for Nvidia, the only point in buying a AMD card for linux is because of the opensource driver.
A company who needs to make money should know their selling points. I very much appreciate the better opensource support vs the non-existent from nvidia, but I really hope that nvidia goes also this path, because that seams the only way (competition) to make you move. Or more realisticly the graphic chips from intel like something like fusion and co gets much faster, so that because of the better driver you get more performance with the intel hardware + better driver than with a amd hardware, and more features.
I mean the I liked zacate and bought it for me and 2 others 4-5 times in notebooks/desktops, but thats only because its fast enough and intel is more expensive.
ok if you always want to and have to underbit intel anyway you get me even with a somewhat good driver, but if you want me to pay the same or even more for a amd produkt vs a intel product nearly the same performance level, you have to become much better.
and please bury this binary blob crap.
Last edited by blackiwid; 05-29-2012 at 09:08 AM.
This was not about gaming but OpenCL - accelerating applications (e.g. GIMP) with your GPU.
I think you are right, they sound like they are not meeting internal goals for their "fusion" or synergy strategy (whatever the marketing name is) or just aren't happy with the progress in some way.
Originally Posted by schmalzler
I think some of the frustration for Linux users comes from the feeling that because of AMD's underdog status they would want to deeply embrace the Linux community and haven't fully made that leap. While they do provide support to the open source driver, it could be so much better. I know that they are fearful about/legally unable to release certain parts of the Radeon specs to the community, but we continue to hope.
I know that if there was full quality support for hardware accelerated video decoding and proper power management, my next laptop would be a Trinity based ultra thin. Also, the low power Trinity chips would be great for HTPC implementations, especially with the ION platform going the way of the dodo.
In a perfect world, I would like AMD to have open source drivers with decent 3D framrates, video acceleration via VDPAU and good power management. I can't help but feel that with these functions, AMD chips would be the go to for a lot of techies building Linux boxes or recommending hardware to their friends. If you throw in OpenCL functionality and application support, AMD on Linux would be in a great spot.
Workstations. That's where the beef still is for AMD. Search for posts by "bridgman".
Originally Posted by blackiwid
Faster update to support new X.org ABI
I would like they to more quickly come out with a new release to support the new ABI of X.org whenever there is a new X.org release.
It usually take them week or months.
Nvidia does this much faster.
Originally Posted by PsynoKhi0
2011 Linux Graphics Survey Results
In that survey only 1/10 are professional users. And I don't believe they pay more for the graphic cards than normal people?
You can't possibly be supporting a statement with the results of a PHORONIX SURVEY, can you? Do you not realize that a phoronix survey only includes responses from people who ACTUALLY VISIT PHORONIX?
Originally Posted by disi
OpenCL? Omg, always this OpenCL. It's a nice thing to have but there are more important things right now like proper video acceleration and power management on par with fglrx for all chips as well as recent chip support. Okay, they're talking about fglrx but this beast needs support for recent kernel x.org in time, better 2d and better compatibility (e.g. WM compositors)
I didn't try to offend you, but this is the only data that I could think of would show some results.
Originally Posted by droidhacker
Of course the sample is limited to people reading the website, but especially here it is more likely to meet Linux professionals than on other pages *I think...