Goodbye ATI

[crazycheese]

You only have the right to receive support for whatever was promised to you. If you buy something that advertises Linux support, then you have the right to that support. If Linux is not mentioned, then Linux support is not one of your rights.

This is why I asked Bridgeman to STEP BEHIND THE OPENSOURCE DRIVER at some time. He was like "Eh?"
Nvidia supports Linux. Gigabyte supports ONLY windows - which is why I never buy Gigabyte.

[hal2k1]

I find that Intel is actually the best solution for the non-gamer. It has good performance for compositing desktops and also video acceleration which enhances the battery life on laptops. But if you want to run commercial 3D games, especially the so called "AAA titles", with all their eye candy and smooth framerates, Intel is the last thing you want. Which leaves ATI and NVidia and their binary drivers (forget the open drivers; not playing at 1920x1080 with as near to 60FPS as possible is not doing it.) And when it comes to binary drivers, NVidia wins. Having VDPAU and what seems the best support from Wine simply sounds like the better option.

What are you talking about?

AMD/ATI with open source Linux divers beats the socks off Intel in terms of bang-for-buck.

Both Intel and AMD/ATI have open source drivers for Linux. Intel's drivers are written by Intel, and Intel set the direction for them. AMD/ATI drivers are written by the Xorg community and by AMD employees. This is far more of a true open source development.

Other than that difference, and the far better bang-for-buck hardware for AMD/ATI GPUs, other aspects of the open source drivers are more or less the same. Intel drivers are no further along in terms of function or capability. AMD/ATI are no less stable. Both drivers are part of, and delivered with, the Linux kernel itself, and so they don't break with a kernel update. Both drivers implement KMS, and so will eventually be able to run Wayland.

Here is the Feature Matrix for the AMD/ATI open source driver:

http://www.x.org/wiki/RadeonFeature

Here is the equivalent list for the Intel driver

http://www.x.org/wiki/IntelGraphicsDriver

The Intel driver has better support for video decode. Video Decode (XvMC/VDPAU/VA-API) using the 3D engine is still a work in progress for the Radeon driver. So far it is only partly in place, but eventually it will support VDPAU, which the Intel driver does not.

Other than that there is, essentially, nothing to chose between them, other than the facts that AMD/ATI is far better hardware and has more community participation and more open governance development.

[RealNC]

What are you talking about?

AMD/ATI with open source Linux divers beats the socks off Intel in terms of bang-for-buck.

I was under the impression that power management and GPU accelerated MPEG video works best on Intel drivers. Which is why Intel looks like the better option for laptops.

Both Intel and AMD/ATI have open source drivers for Linux. Intel's drivers are written by Intel, and Intel set the direction for them. AMD/ATI drivers are written by the Xorg community and by AMD employees. This is far more of a true open source development.

True open source development doesn't impact the importance of power management and video acceleration on saving lots of battery power.

Intel drivers are no further along in terms of function or capability.

You mean to say that Intel also lacks power management and video acceleration? OK, I didn't know that. From what I've been reading here, Intel drivers were supporting those extremely important features.

[hal2k1]

You only have the right to receive support for whatever was promised to you. If you buy something that advertises Linux support, then you have the right to that support. If Linux is not mentioned, then Linux support is not one of your rights.

Indeed. Precisely so.

This is the precise reason why the Radeon open source driver, written by the open source community from programming specifications provided by AMD/ATI, is by far the best bet.

Not only is the AMD/ATI underlying hardware far better value for money, but this driver is the ONLY driver for which the ongoing ability to support it, and the capability to fix issues according to their own priorities, lies with the open source community and not with the OEM of the GPU.

nVidia were able to drop support for legacy GPUs in their nvidia closed binary driver, and ATI could do the same for their closed fglrx driver, but this can't and won't happen for the open source Radeon driver from Xorg.

[hal2k1]

You mean to say that Intel also lacks power management and video acceleration? OK, I didn't know that. From what I've been reading here, Intel drivers were supporting those extremely important features.

No, I mean to say that the Radeon open source drivers don't lack support for power management,

http://www.x.org/wiki/RadeonFeature#KMS_Power_Management_Options

and the issue of the programming specifications for UVD video acceleration hardware being withheld (probably because of DRM associated with HDCP over HDMI) is being worked around using the 3D features of the GPUs. This approach will hopefully bring accelerated video decoding even to legacy GPUs which lack such support embedded in the hardware directly.

Once again, for the Radeon open source drivers, the aims and directions of the code development are not decided by the OEM of the GPU. This is simply not the case for any other graphics driver for Linux except Nouveau, which is constrained instead by the need to reverse engineer.

[RealNC]

No, I mean to say that the Radeon open source drivers don't lack support for power management,

http://www.x.org/wiki/RadeonFeature#...gement_Options

Looks good. Didn't know they got it working. It never worked for me. even using latest Git versions of the driver. Even if I use the low profile, my temps are around 80C. With Catalyst, they go down to low 70's.

Maybe it only works on mobile GPUs, no idea. Phoronix should do a power management benchmark on this; Intel vs AMD and see which one provides lower power consumption.

and the issue of the programming specifications for UVD video acceleration hardware being withheld (probably because of DRM associated with HDMI) is being worked around using the 3D features of the GPUs. This approach will hopefully bring accelerated video decoding even to legacy GPUs which lack such support embedded in the hardware directly.

So OK, in some years from now, AMD will be just as good as Intel. Not right now though.

[hal2k1]

Looks good. Didn't know they got it working. It never worked for me. even using latest Git versions of the driver. Even if I use the low profile, my temps are around 80C. With Catalyst, they go down to low 70's.

Maybe it only works on mobile GPUs, no idea. Phoronix should do a power management benchmark on this; Intel vs AMD and see which one provides lower power consumption.


So OK, in some years from now, AMD will be just as good as Intel. Not right now though.

On my only AMD/ATI-based netbook, temperature runs at 69-70 dgeC.

The support for video decode acceleration and VDPAU is almost there.

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=OTY2OQ

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=OTQ1MQ

XvMC support has landed

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=ODcxOA

So it won't be "a few years".

I see you have no comment on the most salient points.

1. AMD/ATI hardware is far better bang-for-buck

2. For the Radeon open source drivers, the aims and directions of the code development are not decided by the OEM of the GPU. This is simply not the case for any other graphics driver for Linux except Nouveau, which is constrained instead by the need to reverse engineer.

[RealNC]

On my only AMD/ATI-based netbook, temperature runs at 69-70 dgeC.

The support for video decode acceleration and VDPAU is almost there.

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=OTY2OQ

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...item&px=OTQ1MQ

I'll believe it when it works :-)

XvMC support has landed

No one cares about that. H.264 is where battery power goes.

So it won't be "a few years".

Again, I'll believe it when it works. And what do you expect anyway? Someone asks me what laptop to buy and I tell them one with AMD graphics? When they put Linux on it and wonder why stuff doesn't work, they're going to kill me. I'm suggesting what works *now*. That is what's important. Intel is a very safe bet right now. And if they want to run 3D games on it, I'm recommending NVidia. Under no circumstance can I truly recommend AMD as of this moment. If I did, they would come back 3 days later and throw their problematic laptop at my face.

I see you have no comment on the most salient points.

1. AMD/ATI hardware is far better bang-for-buck

On Windows. This is a Linux forum and we're talking about the open source driver. The open source AMD driver is slow.

2. For the Radeon open source drivers, the aims and directions of the code development are not decided by the OEM of the GPU. This is simply not the case for any other graphics driver for Linux except Nouveau, which is constrained instead by the need to reverse engineer.

I don't see how this is important. Not a single person where I installed Linux on his/her machine even cared about the license of the driver. The only thing they care is that it works.

[Kano]

@sabriah

If you really run fglrx you can certainly show me how you use skype with xserver 1.11 + fglrx.

[Fenrin]

...how you use skype with xserver 1.11 + fglrx.

IMHO AMD shouldn't waste development resources to support proprietary Microsoft crap programs under Linux
Mumble is a good free and open alternative to this.