Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMD Stages A Number Of Fixes Ahead Of Linux 4.20~5.0 - Plus Vega 20 "MGPU Fan Boost"

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

  • AMD Stages A Number Of Fixes Ahead Of Linux 4.20~5.0 - Plus Vega 20 "MGPU Fan Boost"

    Phoronix: AMD Stages A Number Of Fixes Ahead Of Linux 4.20~5.0 - Plus Vega 20 "MGPU Fan Boost"

    Following several interesting and exciting feature pull requests for the next Linux kernel (to be released as either version 4.20 or 5.0), AMD developers have moved onto stabilizing this massive amount of new feature code...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...xes-Ahead-4.20

  • #2
    As much as I welcome the AMD driver news, which is good almost every day, I'm certainly not the only one who finally wants out-of-the-box Adaptive Sync support. One has the feeling that we have been "nearing completion" for a year, but that nothing really goes in the direction of completion.

    I really hope that DC and the necessary adjustments in user space will be ready by the middle of next year. And no, the proprietary solution is not an option for most of us.

    BR

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by ryad View Post
      And no, the proprietary solution is not an option for most of us.
      Why, exactly? Unlike fglrx, I see no reason why amdgpu-pro isn't an option for most x86 users.
      Last edited by schmidtbag; 10-11-2018, 09:06 AM.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by ryad View Post
        As much as I welcome the AMD driver news, which is good almost every day, I'm certainly not the only one who finally wants out-of-the-box Adaptive Sync support. One has the feeling that we have been "nearing completion" for a year, but that nothing really goes in the direction of completion.

        I really hope that DC and the necessary adjustments in user space will be ready by the middle of next year. And no, the proprietary solution is not an option for most of us.

        BR
        They've been actively working with Intel and other Devs on getting a community approved/supported implementation done.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by schmidtbag View Post
          Why, exactly? Unlike fglrx, I see no reason why amdgpu-pro isn't an option for most x86 users.
          Well, let's be honest. I, like probably many others, switched to AMD mainly for ideological reasons. Because there are open-source drivers, we are independent of any decisions by the manufacturer and it is more sympathetic to support the underdog (for several reasons). But in terms of performance, the manufacturer doesn't really provide convincing reasons. Neither hardware nor software. To my knowledge, AMD's proprietary Linux driver is still much worse than the Windows driver. Quite contrary to nvidia's Linux driver. It just doesn't make much sense to use the proprietary amdgpu-pro when you can have the same performance with the open-source stack, except adaptive sync of course. But if I wanted to continue using closed-source drivers, I could have stayed with the competitor.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by schmidtbag View Post
            Why, exactly? Unlike fglrx, I see no reason why amdgpu-pro isn't an option for most x86 users.
            Seeing as I have zero interest in RHEL, Ubuntu, SLES/SLEP or CentOS [never mind the strict versions of each] it's DOA for folks who have enjoyed and continue to enjoy Debian [you know the distribution Ubuntu draws upon for its very existence], but yeah everyone uses those others alone, right?

            Instead of rolling a standard OpenCL group of packages against Debian's standard Mesa distribution you have a mess dealing with trying to make the Pro stack work. And with 18.30 they really don't allow it to work outside of those sanctioned options.

            ROCm is a bag of hurt still on Debian. There is probably a reason it has yet to be actually sterilized and sanctioned with a maintainer from Debian.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by ryad View Post
              As much as I welcome the AMD driver news, which is good almost every day, I'm certainly not the only one who finally wants out-of-the-box Adaptive Sync support. One has the feeling that we have been "nearing completion" for a year, but that nothing really goes in the direction of completion.

              I really hope that DC and the necessary adjustments in user space will be ready by the middle of next year.
              Patches for FreeSync support in upstream kernel / xf86-video-amdgpu / Mesa are currently being reviewed, the latest revisions are pretty close to ready. There's a good chance it'll all land this year.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by MrCooper View Post

                Patches for FreeSync support in upstream kernel / xf86-video-amdgpu / Mesa are currently being reviewed, the latest revisions are pretty close to ready. There's a good chance it'll all land this year.
                That would be awesome Hope, you're right!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by ryad View Post
                  Well, let's be honest. I, like probably many others, switched to AMD mainly for ideological reasons. Because there are open-source drivers, we are independent of any decisions by the manufacturer and it is more sympathetic to support the underdog (for several reasons). But in terms of performance, the manufacturer doesn't really provide convincing reasons. Neither hardware nor software. To my knowledge, AMD's proprietary Linux driver is still much worse than the Windows driver. Quite contrary to nvidia's Linux driver. It just doesn't make much sense to use the proprietary amdgpu-pro when you can have the same performance with the open-source stack, except adaptive sync of course. But if I wanted to continue using closed-source drivers, I could have stayed with the competitor.
                  You are making quite a lot of assumptions and broad generalizations here. Mind explaining why AMD has roughly 25% of the Windows marketshare? The vast majority of Windows users don't give a crap about open-source drivers, and yet, AMD still makes sales. In other words, that's quite a large percentage of people who are buying AMD for reasons that are not sharing your ideologies. So clearly, there are other reasons to buy AMD.

                  Typically, Linux hardware usage tends to be pretty similar compared to Windows (when accounting for x86 systems). For example, the GTX 1060 is the most popular on both platforms. I'm sure you can extrapolate from this that there are at roughly the same amount of Linux users who buy AMD for the same incentives that they would have bought AMD when/if using Windows. Of course, there are plenty of people whose decision would be reinforced by the open-source drivers, and, there are also those who, like yourself, only bought AMD strictly because of ideological reasons. That being said, I wouldn't be surprised if the AMD marketshare on Linux is higher than it is on Windows (the Intel GPU marketshare seems to be higher too). But, I'm pretty confident that people who buy AMD strictly for ideological reasons are in the minority, because those who don't prioritize games but still want an open-source platform tend to opt for Intel.

                  All that being said, yes, if you bought AMD solely because of open-source drivers, then the closed-source drivers aren't an option. But I'm willing to bet you any amount of money that regardless of OS, the majority of gamers who have a Freesync display prefer functional drivers over open source ones.

                  Also in many cases, the AMD Linux drivers (open source or otherwise) do actually outperform the Windows drivers. Where they don't, Nvidia's drivers don't tend to, either, due to insufficient optimizations of their porting.


                  Originally posted by Marc Driftmeyer View Post
                  Instead of rolling a standard OpenCL group of packages against Debian's standard Mesa distribution you have a mess dealing with trying to make the Pro stack work. And with 18.30 they really don't allow it to work outside of those sanctioned options.

                  ROCm is a bag of hurt still on Debian. There is probably a reason it has yet to be actually sterilized and sanctioned with a maintainer from Debian.
                  I agree that AMD has made a bit of a mess regarding their drivers, though, I'm also inclined to believe this problem you bring up is also Debian's fault; not just AMD's.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    That's a lot of fixes. I hope broken tty / *ERROR* REG_WAIT timeout 10us * 3000 tries - dce110_stream_encoder_dp_blank is finally fixed there.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X