Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMD Puts Out An OpenGL 4.2 Linux Driver

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

  • phoronix
    started a topic AMD Puts Out An OpenGL 4.2 Linux Driver

    AMD Puts Out An OpenGL 4.2 Linux Driver

    Phoronix: AMD Puts Out An OpenGL 4.2 Linux Driver

    While Mesa won't have OpenGL 4.2 support for some time, NVIDIA released an OpenGL 4.2 preview driver on Monday as soon as the Khronos Group had published the new specification. AMD yesterday has now released a beta Linux driver (of their Catalyst blob, nothing to do with open-source) that provides OpenGL 4.2 support...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=OTc4MA

  • mirv
    replied
    Originally posted by 3vi1 View Post
    TLDNR: v8envy's not the troll, mirv is - because he trolled me into summing up why I and others have valid reasons for our belief that AMD's drivers are not currently anywhere equal to nVidia's.
    Actually, I had to laugh there. See, the problem is that I see many coming along with the nvidia blinders on, say that amd sucks (without giving reasons), nvidia is perfect (when it's not) and how when people have no issues with AMD cards and plenty with nvidia cards, well they can't possibly be right.
    So if I've "trolled" someone into actually giving some reasons, well, I can't say that I'm ashamed. But we're still not there yet. Crashes and problems - which I've had with nvidia drivers, oh no, that's how painful they can be (hmm....really, I can't classify that as any summary). AMD drivers working better for my applications doesn't make nvidia drivers totally crap, and nvidia need to pull their act together (well, ok, they really should work on helping out the open source effort). It's very interesting how if I mention that AMD driver's are more stable, I'm flamed....but notice now, after all that, I haven't actually given any reasons either.
    (people might remember me going over a similar topic every now and then - but you know what, it usually works and gets some discussion going with actual problems, actual reasons, and a bit more level-headed talk).

    Leave a comment:


  • 3vi1
    replied
    I like AMD. I really want to see them compete because I like options (and, you can't just swap card manufacturers in your laptops).

    But... my hands on experiences with several AMD cards have been much like v8envy's. He's not trolling just for saying that the nVidia drivers usually just work better. Many of us who own both and have spent our fair share of time fighting with both share that opinion.

    Just one instance: Last year, I won a gaming rig with a Radeon HD 5870. It had problems with so many Linux apps that I fought with it for two weeks and ended up giving it to one of my kids for their Winbox... installing their lesser powered nVidia card in the new rig. Yes, a downgrade was preferable to fighting with screen corruption, crashes, and other problems. THAT's how painful the AMD Linux drivers can be.

    And I saw problems all around - not just with Wine (though that was particularly bad - over a half dozen of my Steam games not working at all whereas they worked fine with the lesser nVidia card), but also in KWin and Compiz (not being used concurrently, of course). At that time I became very familiar with the AMD user communities and unofficial bug-tracker - and my problems were not new or unique. Conversely, I honestly can't remember the last time I had a problem with the nVidia drivers that I'm using on four other machines.

    If AMD has somehow gotten their act together in the last year, great. I somehow doubt that though, considering I still see plenty of new bugs in the various reporting places, and launchpad shows there are 3x the number of outstanding bugs for the Ubuntu fglrx packages as there are for the nvidia-current drivers. That's even more damning when you take into consideration that more Linux users use nVidia cards (according to the Phoronix Global stats).

    Stability and bugs aside - the real problem with AMD is that it takes them months to release fixed versions when there's breakage due to new kernels or Xorg revs. That's probably not a huge concern for "normal" users (are there any "normal" Linux users? ), but it's a showstopper for those of us that ride the bleeding edge. For that reason alone, I wouldn't recommend their cards to anyone that really wants to hack on Linux.

    TLDNR: v8envy's not the troll, mirv is - because he trolled me into summing up why I and others have valid reasons for our belief that AMD's drivers are not currently anywhere equal to nVidia's.
    Last edited by 3vi1; 08-23-2011, 02:11 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • mirv
    replied
    Originally posted by v8envy View Post
    This and other boards are full of disappointed people expecting the impossible from AMD drivers. Partly because others cause these unrealistic expectations by attacking anyone who says differently with useless "troll" responses.

    Do you disagree that the NV blob *CURRENTLY* works better for Wine, Gnome Shell and KDE 4.7? I also find it works better for OpenCL (with the NV blob you can compute without firing up an X session) and video playback. Sure, it could be because all Linux software other than fglrx is crap and should be rewritten to work nicely with fglrx, but realistically that just isn't going to happen.

    Are you implying that it's realistic to buy less functional hardware today and then address that by whining on message boards? Instead of a useless response point out where I'm "trolling."

    Until then I stand by my statement. For a desktop user expecting today's NV grade feature set the only reasonable option is to use NV hardware and software.
    the nvidia blobs quite often don't "just work" (quite a few people have, or have had, power issues, broken desktops, non-functional x, etc etc etc). If you come along saying that nvidia are perfect, amd suck, well that's basically troll speak. AMD's drivers are not less functional than nvidia's, aside from the gpu video accel, and currently both have enough issues with wine, and with any desktop they're about on par. Now the open source drivers (which I don't use) are apparently very nice for a desktop, though performance and opengl need more work (except I see with older hardware, then it's top notch already).
    If you're suggesting that people should ignore the faults of the nvidia drivers because wine devs have had more time to work around nvidia driver bugs (a wine status that already belongs mostly to the past - I'm not sure it's even applicable today) then yes, I'll call out troll.

    Leave a comment:


  • v8envy
    replied
    This and other boards are full of disappointed people expecting the impossible from AMD drivers. Partly because others cause these unrealistic expectations by attacking anyone who says differently with useless "troll" responses.

    Do you disagree that the NV blob *CURRENTLY* works better for Wine, Gnome Shell and KDE 4.7? I also find it works better for OpenCL (with the NV blob you can compute without firing up an X session) and video playback. Sure, it could be because all Linux software other than fglrx is crap and should be rewritten to work nicely with fglrx, but realistically that just isn't going to happen.

    Are you implying that it's realistic to buy less functional hardware today and then address that by whining on message boards? Instead of a useless response point out where I'm "trolling."

    Until then I stand by my statement. For a desktop user expecting today's NV grade feature set the only reasonable option is to use NV hardware and software.

    Leave a comment:


  • mirv
    replied
    Oh look, a troll.....

    Leave a comment:


  • v8envy
    replied
    Originally posted by madbiologist View Post

    Just stick with KDE 4.6 for now and you'll be OK. Or use Unity
    Or do what the majority of users playing with GPUs on Linux do: run nvidia hardware. Their blob may have its own set of bugs but due to much wider end user adoption and unilateral developer support it's far more likely to "just work." I don't like it either, but that's current reality -- use the nv blob now while waiting a few more years for fglrx and radeon drivers to mature and improve.

    If you're fine with older hardware (with the caveat it'll likely be unsupported much sooner than contemporary NV hardware), older software (while not being very demanding in terms of performance or desktop features) fglrx is slowly maturing to the point of being an option. NV had about half a decade head start on the blob and a decade on the open source driver so there's plenty of catch-up to do.

    Neither AMD driver is "there" yet. And neither one is likely to be "there" for at least half a dozen more GPU hardware cycles. Expecting magic just because you bought the wrong hardware for your needs and expectations just isn't realistic.

    Leave a comment:


  • madbiologist
    replied
    Originally posted by RealNC View Post
    From that point of view, I could offer a driver that hangs your system when trying to use a resolution of 1920x1080 and then declare that resolution "unsupported" and therefore my driver must be, like, totally awesome.

    No. It would still suck. Just like fglrx does. If you suck, you label stuff "unsupported" and that makes you a quality product? Don't make me laugh :-P
    Different context mate. If Ubuntu 11.04, Fedora 15 et. al. didn't support 1920x1080 then what you say might be valid. Also, ATI do not declare support for desktops or other components, instead they declare support for distribution versions, as PsynoKhi0 said. KDE 4.7 just happens to be so new (_still_ less than a month old) that no distributions have it yet. As you said, KDE released betas and RCs of 4.7, but I don't think even Fedora 15 had those.

    Just stick with KDE 4.6 for now and you'll be OK. Or use Unity

    Leave a comment:


  • d2kx
    replied
    The final 11.8 driver is out in two days anyway, so if you don't need OpenGL 4.2 right now, just wait a bit.

    Leave a comment:


  • RealNC
    replied
    Originally posted by PsynoKhi0 View Post
    Which none of the distributions officially supported by fglrx ship with... How many times does that have to be said? Seriously?
    If it's not officially supported the implicit message is: you're on your own, but by all means, roll up your sleeves, track bugs, and fill in helpful tickets.
    When someone is knowledgeable enough to tinker with the DE, that's the least they should be expected to accomplish.
    You fail to understand the point. The simple fact that it's unsupported means suckage. You can't say it's alright just because they put the label "unsupported" on it. From that point of view, I could offer a driver that hangs your system when trying to use a resolution of 1920x1080 and then declare that resolution "unsupported" and therefore my driver must be, like, totally awesome.

    No. It would still suck. Just like fglrx does. If you suck, you label stuff "unsupported" and that makes you a quality product? Don't make me laugh :-P

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X