Originally posted by drakonas777
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
CoreCtrl 1.4 Brings Radeon RX 7000 Series Fan Curve Controls, Intel CPU Temperatures
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by anda_skoa View Post
I wouldn't put it past patent holders to explicitly deny licenses for usage on Linux, though this might not last very long given the markets such as embedded, entertainment systems, handheld gaming, etc are either already Linux dominated or moving into that direction
Comment
-
Originally posted by NeoMorpheus View PostGiven the free passes that Ngreedia gets with all their antifoss actions in these parts, maybe the same group would accept an AMD binary blob including those things that cannot be open sourced as an optional installation.
If you read through the rather informative "rant" by skeevy420 it says "their Pro tools and drivers only work on Ubuntu, SLED, and RHEL (Scroll to the bottom)".
Which is usually an indication for proprietary and binary-only software which can only be verified to work on a small subset of systems.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by NeoMorpheus View Post
Sadly for you, Linux is moving away from the elitist realm, so sooner rather than later will get more proper GUI oriented user friendly menus.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by anda_skoa View PostNothing wrong with a bit of ranting if it contains so much valuable information
On one hand I can see the value of having explicit information on feature support, on the other hand it might deter potential customers who might not even need those.
I can also imagine that it would be a somewhat moving target if it depends on version combinations of maybe components (driver, kernel, OS release, Mesa, etc.)
It could end up with dozens or even hundreds of footnote numbers instead of simple "supported on Linux" asterisks.
You'd probably need structured data and a query/filter interface to be actually useful for an end user.
Right. As I said before the absence of the Adrenaline suite is more likely caused by the need to keep this blurriness than any specific technology's requirements.
A sort of "unfortunate ambiguity" that allows the to plan their priorities rather than having them "dictated" by bad publicity.
For example allowing them to prioritize features needed by Steam Deck over AI.
If Valve (and their customers) are happy, the next iteration will again be designed around AMD.
The AI market is much harder and would require much more effort because Nvidia had such a head start.
Just a guess obviously
As far as the rest, the AI market complaining about ROCm and the Pro stack in regards to selling hardware for doing AI work is what is going to get the ball moving to make AMD's Linux software just as accessible as NVIDIA's Linux software. They're complaining about this just as much as us forum folks are. Geohot and the tiny corp has been tweeting about it for a while now, including today. Ironically, they're willing to leave open driver AMD for closed driver NVIDIA because at least closed driver NVIDIA has reproducible builds with their black boxes. AMD makes great hardware and their software sucks. If you only play games you'd maybe never know.
I wonder if third party review sites like Phoronix could compile and update such a thing
My guess is the former rather than the latter.
Impressive list, thank you!
Have to admit I hadn't even heard about some of those before
Can you clarify what you mean with "we don't have them on Linux" as some of the items seem to mention Linux implementations?
Maybe that has already sufficiently good enough support through 3rd party tools?
Ironically, that's been said to me and pissed me off. I said it in my first post of this thread and probably pissed someone else off. We're talking about all this in a thread about one of those good enough 3rd party tools. Nothing about graphics on Linux is ideal. AMD, Intel, or NVIDIA. None of them are perfect. Especially for professional users:
NVIDIA has the best software and software availability, but it's closed. Their hardware is the most expensive even though it doesn't always perform the best dollar for dollar with the competition. People pay a premium to get NVIDIA's industry leading software.
Intel also has industry leading software and they're mostly open source, too. Their graphics hardware...ehhhhh...it's not the best. It's No. 1 displayer of potassium. Other graphics cards display inferior potassium. All their companies are ran by little girls.
AMD has OK software with the worst availability. Their hardware can be the best on paper and will trades blows with NVIDIA, but the software isn't that great nor does it run everywhere like Intel and NVIDIA software. They really need to worry about Intel getting their graphics hardware kinks worked out.
IMHO, tools like Corectrl, Adriconf, and desktop environment system settings existing isn't a good reason for AMD to make OK software with the worst availability.
I wouldn't put it past patent holders to explicitly deny licenses for usage on Linux, though this might not last very long given the markets such as embedded, entertainment systems, handheld gaming, etc are either already Linux dominated or moving into that direction
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by NeoMorpheus View Post
Given the free passes that Ngreedia gets with all their antifoss actions in these parts, maybe the same group would accept an AMD binary blob including those things that cannot be open sourced as an optional installation.
AMD's developers and partners were assuring ppl that it was a kernel issue - but, now that kernel 6.8 is out and the next one is being worked on - this situation doesn't sound any better.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by skeevy420 View PostI tried to leave it as clean and to the point as I could.
Originally posted by skeevy420 View PostHaving a special Linux page shouldn't detract Windows-only customers.
People who look for compatibility information rather than just buying something from a vendor that certifies Linux compatibility.
Of course it would be nice if such information existed, was accurate and up to date, most other vendors don't really do that either.
Back in the day when I had a laptop with an Nvidia GPU their website did not mention it would make it impossible to resume after sleep.
Which is a much more central feature on a laptop than any of the not yet supported things we are discussing for AMD.
Originally posted by skeevy420 View PostFrom what I can surmise, there are only three reasons: Window Managers, Proprietary, and We Haven't Done It Yet (like Chill).
"We haven't done it yet" would likely be a simple kernel version the foot note could point to.
"Window Managers", on the other hand, would likely consist of at least the various versions of those products, but very likely also versions of libraries like Mesa or even kernel versions.
What would the foot note point to that isn't a table with all kinds of combinations?
Or a query/filter interface on a database in which you could enter your values and get a "supported/unsupported" answer.
An again, of course it would be great to have that, I am just saying this is likely much more effort than a simple asterisk
Originally posted by skeevy420 View PostTo me, the Steam Deck is an odd one to use because Valve has been implementing things that AMD's Adrenaline does, but only for Valve's hardware.
I do agree that AMD could probably have done this generically in the first place.
Originally posted by skeevy420 View PostAs far as the rest, the AI market complaining about ROCm and the Pro stack in regards to selling hardware for doing AI work is what is going to get the ball moving to make AMD's Linux software just as accessible as NVIDIA's Linux software.
The point I was trying to make was more along the lines of "if resources are limited it might make sense to address needs of an existing product and consumers before addressing a new market".
Of course the better option would be to increase the resources to do both.
Originally posted by skeevy420 View PostWhat would be hard would be keeping up with open source projects and how to use them. That'd be a full time job in and of itself.
Would be great though, regardless of who does it
Originally posted by skeevy420 View PostI rewrote that post 2 or 3 times and lost clarity there. I should have said something like "why we don't have everything on Linux" or "why we don't have all of these on Linux".
More along "incomplete support" than "no support".
Originally posted by skeevy420 View PostIMHO, tools like Corectrl, Adriconf, and desktop environment system settings existing isn't a good reason for AMD to make OK software with the worst availability.
I didn't mean to suggest they wouldn't have to do anything. Just that I can see how the existence of such tools would reduce the priority of AMD to do their equivalent essentially again.
But even in that case they could be helping by providing explicit API (assuming that the 3rd party tools currently need to resort to talking to the driver or even device nodes).
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by Panix View PostAMD gpus can't utilize hdmi 2.1 in Linux and have some Mickey Mouse display port connection juggling and also have no reliable method to undervolt or obtain fan control with recent gen gpus - but, yes, this is THE YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP! lmao!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
AMD's developers and partners were assuring ppl that it was a kernel issue - but, now that kernel 6.8 is out and the next one is being worked on - this situation doesn't sound any better.
Phoronix, Linux Hardware Reviews, Linux hardware benchmarks, Linux server benchmarks, Linux benchmarking, Desktop Linux, Linux performance, Open Source graphics, Linux How To, Ubuntu benchmarks, Ubuntu hardware, Phoronix Test Suite
- Likes 1
Comment
Comment