Originally posted by djee
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Catalyst 10.1 and Xorg 7.5 / 1.7.x?
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by RealNC View PostIMO, power management is the only thing missing from the OSS drivers. If I operate my 4870 with the open drivers, it sits there and fries. You could cook hamburgers on it.
Comment
-
@bridgman
Basically the "new GPU" support is certainly done in the shared part of the fglrx driver that would be the same in Win. There is absolutely no excuse that the Linux/X bindings around the binary part is not updated yet. Nv managed that months ago! Or do you want to claim that your ATI's fglrx Linux "team" (or is ist just 1 person?) has to work on GPU upgrades as well?
Comment
-
Originally posted by energyman View Postand what is so important about 1.7 that you must have it? Apart from the version number?
oh wait.. nothing.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Kano View Post@bridgman
Basically the "new GPU" support is certainly done in the shared part of the fglrx driver that would be the same in Win. There is absolutely no excuse that the Linux/X bindings around the binary part is not updated yet. Nv managed that months ago! Or do you want to claim that your ATI's fglrx Linux "team" (or is ist just 1 person?) has to work on GPU upgrades as well?Test signature
Comment
-
Originally posted by SwedishPenguin View PostWell, I guess I will return my HD4670 and get an Nvidia equivlent. If someone from AMD/ATI is reading this forum: you lost another sale, fess up and at the very least provide drivers for stable Xorg and kernel releases. How hard can it be? Does the API really change that much between releases? Nvidia can obviously keep up.
NV effectively moved away from all common X code and the resultant invasive binary replacement of things like libglx. So yes, they get it easier due to less interfaces that need to be kept in sync.
ATI (or at least when I was there) had a less-invasive driver, but was more prone to break X release to X release since it was exposed to XAA/DRI/GLX, etc and there was lots of changes happening with them.
The end result is that ATI has to move away from the standard interfaces (much the same as NV), but will be more invasive on install. Difficult choice, but that's where it sits.
IIRC, the last 3 releases of Xorg broke ABI compatibility with GLX, DRI and I think some core X functions. That's the price for "Innovation".
Matthew
Comment
-
Nobody looks how "invasive" the drivers are - they just have to work. As the mesa libs are always exchanged it does not matter if there are more files exchanged or not. You can not mix fglrx with other cards for 3d anyway (well maybe using a LIBDIR override, but who does that) so nobody will care.
Comment
-
That way with every supported Xserver the installer has got extra binaries. Logically the installer is getting bigger everytime. The latest nvidia drivers grew too, but more due to extra opencl libs. ATI ships the same driver multiply times.
Comment
Comment