Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

ATI Radeon HD 5770 is not Linux Compatible Despite Advertisement

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

  • ATI Radeon HD 5770 is not Linux Compatible Despite Advertisement

    I have noticed several threads online, specifically this forum, where Linux users are misleadingly talking about how well their Radeon HD 5770 is working in their linux systems, failing to mention that they're talking about dual boot setups and also failing to mention that the performance they're talking about is on a Microsoft system.

    The ATI Radeon HD 5770 Card is not supported by any linux version of catalyst, despite the Catalyst documentation claiming that support for this card was introduced in Catalyst 9.11, and despite it being listed as a supported card in 9.12.

    I've been in touch with several reps at ATI/AMD and the response I got was that the linux driver was offered 'as is' and that their support wasn't official. That's actually the only support that was given. Period. "A deal is a deal, sucker!".

    By 'not officially supported', I think the rep meant "we are not going to support it at all"-- as indicated by ATI/AMDs true failure to get a working driver for this card going.

    I've tested this card's compatibility with almost all mainstream linux distros to find that the catalyst driver versions 9.11 and 9.12 (and the hotfix as well), while claiming to support this card, actually do not support the Radeon HD 5770. If someone is telling you otherwise, they are either lying or poorly communicating that they are using the driver on a Microsoft Operating system.

    What I have not tested, is support in the Red Hat Enterprise, OpenSUSE, or Ubuntu distros as the version of catalyst for these distros is a special build tailored to those specific distros (and is designed not to work with other distros). Why, oh why, would AMD promise to fix the proprietary attitude that almost wiped ATI out of the industry (which necessitated their buyout) only to follow up with the exact same kind of customer-alienating behaviour?

    So, if you need to use a linux system, and some people do, have a backup card-- this thing is a paperweight until someone at AMD reads this and realizes that people are going to eventually associate their brand name with these kinds of problems if they don't start tailoring to the compatibility needs of their customers.

  • FacUtSciam
    replied
    I've run GIMP in Fedora with whatever driver I have now. It seemed to work okay. That is the absolute most intense use of my GPU I will ever need in Linux. I will repeat what I said before: AS LONG AS I CAN SEE MY TERMINAL, I'M SET. For me, "just see[ing] a picture" IS enough. Do you understand what I'm saying? I don't care if I can't use xv (by the way, what is xv?). I don't care if I can't use Fedora's "desktop effects" because I don't need them to write Fortran code. My compiler doesn't depend on 3D hardware acceleration. As far as I can tell, "./" runs an executable just as well on my driver as yours.

    I think we're just going to have to disagree on this.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kano
    replied
    Because it is not enough when you just see a picture! You can not even use xv with oss drivers!

    Leave a comment:


  • FacUtSciam
    replied
    Kano, you should really tell us who you're talking to. Are you telling me that I need to install drivers for a device that is already doing everything that I want it to do? Why would I do that? I find it a little asinine to tell someone they're wrong when you've never even seen their system. Installing new drivers to get functionality that I don't use or need when whatever drivers I do have are functioning perfectly well doesn't seem in any way "right" to me. If I was planning on trying to game in linux, I would consider new drivers.

    I posted on this forum to share my experience with running various distros on the 5770, thinking maybe I could provide some information that wasn't here before. The whole point I was trying to make is that even the stock drivers give basic functionality in almost every distro I've tried, which is evidence against the claim of the OP. I wasn't looking for unsolicited advice on fixing what's not broken, but thanks anyway...

    Leave a comment:


  • Kano
    replied
    You are wrong, you need fglrx drivers - the latest ones. Forget the default oss crap.

    Leave a comment:


  • FacUtSciam
    replied
    [QUOTE=Kano;137839]@FacUtSciam

    I do not really get why you want to test the stock performance of a distro.



    I don't want to test the performance of the distro. The only thing I use Linux for is writing programs for my research. As long as a distro has compilers and a terminal, I'm set. For gaming, I have Windows and consoles. For videos, I have a TV. I could literally do everything I need to on a 15 or 20 year old distro. What I want to understand the performance of is the system itself. I want to know how the stock system behaves so that I'll know whether everything's okay if I do decide to overclock. The reason I haven't bothered to install any drivers in my Linux partitions is because I don't need to. I can already see everything I need to.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kano
    replied
    @jmcharron

    It was you, as a fast gfx card needs a fast cpu too. 3.2 ghz should be enough, but wine and dx games is always slow. There is too much overhead converting dx to opengl calls. Would be good when you could compare Unigine Heaven 2.1 with tesselation in the same setting with Win+Linux with you GTX 465. I mean DX11+OpenGL on Win + Linux. Forget benching dx games with wine.

    @FacUtSciam

    I do not really get why you want to test the stock performance of a distro. When you would install my own then you don't have got a binary ATI driver installed. That's done later by a script. This script also works with other Debian and Ubuntu systems. It is highly recommended to use it instead of running the pure ati installer especially on 64 bit (no 64 bit xvba libs are installed) and U lucid (the ati installer will kill the way u can switch between drivers). Of course it is not logical to test only the "shipped" driver, even when you could install it via jockey (Ubuntu).

    In my experience ATI drivers does not get much better over time, just very small issues are resolved. Compared to Nv the driver is very basic and only a bit optimized for games (you can test Unigine Heaven 2.1) but in no way for video playback.

    Leave a comment:


  • jmcharron
    replied
    Originally posted by Kano View Post
    Which CPU?
    Mmm you asking me?

    I have a AMD Phenom II x4 955

    Leave a comment:


  • FacUtSciam
    replied
    who?

    Originally posted by Kano View Post
    Which CPU?
    Since I'm not sure whose CPU you're asking about, I'll answer just in case. I have an AMD Phenom II x6 1090T (3.2GHz) on an MSI mobo with AMD 890 north, AMD SB850 south, 8GB OCZ ddr3 ram. I haven't overclocked anything, since I want to know how the system behaves stock first.

    Leave a comment:


  • Fluggo
    replied
    @highlandsun

    You are running the VESA driver in RHEL and will not get resolutions above 1600 unless you install the latest Catalyst driver (10.6) which is supported on RHEL 5.5.

    I can also confirm that HD5770 works like a charm on RHEL 5.5 and CentOS 5.5 with the Catalyst driver installed.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X