ATI's Radeon Linux drivers no longer supported? 666
SuperBug writes "After viewing the previous story on Slashdot about the Radeon 9800 vs GF FX 5900, I checked out ATI's web-site which seems to have been re-designed relatively recently. It seems strikingly similar to nVidia's site regarding the driver selections. I thought "great, ths should be much better to find my drivers now. At least a little simpler." To my surprise. I found this message for Linux Graphics Drivers "Not Supported". Thinking this had to be a mistake, I took a look at the "Discontinued Products" list under the customer care link and lo and behold. Just about every recent card is there. I just wanna know, what gives?"
possible answers? (Score:5, Informative)
Mike
Radeon is supported by XFree86 team (Score:2, Informative)
Re:possible answers? (Score:2, Informative)
Yeah, but they don't answer any questions relevant to dropping Linux support, at least that I saw.
This article is all wrong (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.schneider-digital.de/html/download_ati. html [schneider-digital.de]
ATI's Alexander Stohr still works on these drivers (and is a lurker of the dri-devel mailing list.)
Lastly, why don't slashdot editors do some sort of background checking. What are they being paid for?
Sunny Dubey
Re:possible answers? (Score:5, Informative)
They no longer have them on the web site.
The FAQ is old, and has not been updated.
Red hat supported the radeon (Score:2, Informative)
Isn't this suppored by DRI? (Score:5, Informative)
Discontinued products (Score:5, Informative)
Re:This article is all wrong (Score:5, Informative)
Sunny Dubey
ATI Linux Drivers (Score:5, Informative)
So you have to decide the between the lesser of two evils, I guess.
Re:possible answers? (Score:4, Informative)
Full-featured and optimized XFree86 drivers are available on the ATI website for the following product families ONLY:
- RADEON 9700
- RADEON 9000
- RADEON 8500
- FireGL Workstation products
The FireGL drivers are still listed if you go through the drivers page [ati.com]Now having said all of this, ATI never supported the Linux drivers anyway. They provide documentation and tell you where to find drivers for Linux, but the drivers themselves are actually external to ATI. ATI generally provide patches to E.g. XFree86 but they do not maintain the drivers themselves. So whats new?
Re:possible answers? (Score:5, Informative)
Nothing new here
ATI is still providing support... (Score:2, Informative)
ATI actively assists qualified 3rd party Linux developers writing software for the majority of ATI products by providing them with development kits and information.
I take it this means to say they'll help out if someone wants to write Linux drivers for their products, but they're not committing to writing Linux drivers themselves.
Richard Huddy from ATI answered that question (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Is that an official distribution? (Score:5, Informative)
Sunny Dubey
Re:ATI Linux Drivers (Score:2, Informative)
If I were buying a graphics card for Linux these days, I wouldn't buy an nVidia simply because of this reason.
Re:NVidia vs. ATI (Score:3, Informative)
Just grab the GLX and Kernel [4363 is latest] tar.gz's. Unpack them, export IGNORE_CC_MISMATCH=true. go into the Kernel directory, make, go into the GLX directory, make, go into
now either reboot or isnmod nvidia and launch startx. Boom NVIDIA drivers.
It took me a while to figure that out [specially the IGNORE_CC part] but once I did I had no troubles installing the files.
All in all if you know what you are doing it takes 3 minutes to install the drivers and GLX portions.
Tom
Discontinued products (Score:5, Informative)
The removal of the binary-only Linux drivers (not to be confused with the "radeon" XFree driver) is news to me, though.
Re:possible answers? (Score:4, Informative)
Here is how to install Radeon support (Score:1, Informative)
Open Source drivers (Score:3, Informative)
Now I don't know (or have I tried) anything about their Radeon support. I simply don't have a Radeon card. But if it works as well as the Rage and AIW, then these are definitely the drivers for you!.
I guess very few ever heard of it... (Score:2, Informative)
By the way, if one want's the real ATI drivers, one should get the FireGL drivers, which I already confirmed, they are still on the site, as always were. Those were the only Linux drivers ATI ever had in its site.
Re:Isn't this suppored by DRI? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Here is how to install Radeon support (Score:2, Informative)
All-in-Wonder Radeon 9700 (Radeon300)
We have received documentation for this card and sample hardware (thanks to ATI !), work is underway.
ATI (EU) on why no driver support for Linux (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Radeon Mobility performance under DRI is awful. (Score:3, Informative)
Please give the output of glxinfo and ensure you are actually using DRI.
A "properly" installed DRI does not use 0666 so you may not have permission to access the DRI devices, in which case your glxgears run is testing your CPU.
A Dell Inspiron @800MHz with a Mobility M3 (R128 model) pumps out 450-500fps on glxgears, but only 180 without DRI.
Re:possible answers? (Score:5, Informative)
hopefully this will solve your problems.
Re:Radeon is supported by XFree86 team (Score:5, Informative)
They also refuse to provide the information to XiG, so you don't even have the choice of buying a commercial driver.
I don't know if this helps but... (Score:4, Informative)
Maybe ati sent them the specs?
Re:This article is all wrong (Score:3, Informative)
It is true that the FireGL drivers can be used on more recent ATI cards, but ATI should then list them in the Graphic Driver section and not hide them in the FireGL section.
And the fact remains that ATI is being disingenuous to claim on their Linux FAQ [ati.com] that while at the same time saying [slo-tech.com]
It is hypocritical and false advertising to boot. I see no reason to cut ATI any slack.
Re:Radeon is supported by XFree86 team (Score:5, Informative)
From the Interview last week...
Slo-Tech: When will ATI provide open source (Linux) developers with information about yours hardware so that they will be able to write drivers instead of reverse engineer them?
Richard Huddy: ATI gives Linux drivers quite a high priority - but there's just way too much intellectual property exposed in the low level chip interfaces so we don't put that into the public domain. I'm amazed that people can really reverse engineer drivers from our binaries - but I guess that shows just how keen the Linux community is to get the best out of their machines. Sorry I can't offer more on this!
Re:possible answers? (Score:3, Informative)
When I went to inform them of this problem, I couldn't find a link or an email address to let them know about the issue.
Re:Not just Linux (Score:2, Informative)
And if that was just a typo, you're blind; there's a BIG "DRIVERS" button on the www.ati.com front page. Click that. Then from the lists, select "Graphic driver," "Windows [whatever version]," and then "RADEON Family."
The page works in Firebird, and IE. If you're using Opera, or some other browser, switch to IE and give it a go there.
Gawd.. How the hell that post was "Insightful" I'll never know..
Drivers are still there (Score:2, Informative)
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Article is a lie, falsification---Slander, even (Score:4, Informative)
I was curious, and tried their website, which is much better than it used to be, now it is like nvidias.
Lets see-----Graphic Drivers, Linux, 8500.
Funny, their are drivers there. Sure, they are a little old, but whatever, ATI always has old drivers on their site.
Then, lets see. Where I usually go---
Fire GL, Linux, FireGL 8800
The new drivers---> Both packages above are the fglrx drivers. Both unofficially are supported on the Radeon 8500 through the Radeon 9700.
Get a life, people. ATI driver support has not changed. They have always unofficially supported linux in this fashion--->if their drivers cost you $10,000 in hardware, thats your problem. I'll bet that NVIDIA's 'official' support, however, has a liability wavier associated with. The only difference is that NVIDIA supports their card, if their driver fries it, while ATI will not.
But, I've never seen any device's driver fry the hardware from its manufacturer.
Besides, which of these two manufactures releases the specs on their cards? Which of these two manufactures has active open source drivers in development? ATI has been MUCH better to the linux community than Nvidia.
Even if their hardware/drivers are slightly buggier.
Re:Radeon is supported by XFree86 team (Score:2, Informative)
It's only part of them. If you search the dri-devel mailinglist archives then you will find some features were not given to DRI developers.
Re:possible answers? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:I don't know if this helps but... (Score:3, Informative)
The Radeon 9200 is an rv280-based card, according to the naming scheme [sourceforge.net].
UPDATE: This is a non-story, Drivers Exist!!! (Score:2, Informative)
Please update the front page... I know that slashdot is a timesink, and severely decreases productivity. Yes, I realize it also has a healing effect on the damage psyches of those addicted to reading it every so often. However, this story reaches a new low.
Some dude, who's failed to spend a couple of days figuring out what's really going on posts an inflammatory and stress inducing story on the front page of this green rag.
From posted comments (no I never read slashdot comments) there appear to be binary drivers and XF86 drivers available.
An update on the front page would probably save abou 358,654 hours of wasted time by slashdot readers.
http://www.schneider-digital.de/html/download_a
radeon tv out support (Score:3, Informative)
For the original radeon and close derivatives (radeon mobility M6, M7, mobility 7500, and IGP 320M/340M but not regular radeon 7500 or anything above), the way to get TV output is to boot the computer up with the TV plugged in, and run atitvout [uni-hamburg.de]. This program clones the normal display onto the TV. All acceleration features that are normally supported on the display are also supported on the TV.
For radeon 7500 and above, a different technique is required: there you simply boot up the computer with the TV attached, and TV output is automatic. But, if you want to run X on the TV output you must use the VESA driver and not the radeon driver. Consequently the card's acceleration features are not available in X on the TV output. However, as a special case, video playback overlay acceleration is available on the TV out using the xvidix [mplayerhq.hu] driver in mplayer.
Basically, the situation is not ideal, but it is a long way from being hopeless.
Re:possible answers? (Score:3, Informative)
ati linux 2.9.12
-or-
ati linux 2.9.13
You'll find prerelease drivers that work fine with 4.3
What a bunch of reactionary crap ... (Score:5, Informative)
I've read through this thread and read "ATI is great and you're a moron" and "ATI sucks and YOU'RE a moron"
Let's review:
ATI's website has been revamped. Completely replacing a website this large in place is, one would expect, nontrivial. We can expect a few glitches here and there. It's not like some guy at GeoCities unveiling his new "Pamela's Yummy Tits" website. It's certainly NOT worthy of this level of discussion (term used VERY loosely) when the simple fact is, as you're about to see, it's all about
After reading all about the horrors facing innocent Linux-using high-end Radeon owners, I did the unthinkable: before posting ANYthing I visited the site for myself. I know, I know, the ancient Greek method of simply thinking about something and then expounding on it rather than actually sullying ones' self by investigating
First I went here [ati.com].
Then I clicked the big link called "DRIVERS". That brought me to here. [ati.com]
In the left pane I clicked "Graphic Driver". The pane to the right of that then presented an array of choices. I chose "Linux" and then from the pane just to the right of that I chose "RADEON 9700 PRO".
And what did I find after clicking the little red and quite intuitive "GO" button?
And there you go. Emergency over. After reading all the pure CRAP in this thread I must say it was a bit of a letdown.
And for those a bit braver, beta drivers for X 4.3 can be found HERE [schneider-digital.de] If you want to know what the deal is with these drivers (which are much newer than the ones on the main ATI site) just head over to HERE [rage3d.com] and you'll find lots of comments made by people who have (*gasp!*) actually USED the drivers instead of just making uninformed and mostly WRONG sweeping statements about them on Slashdot.
I apologize. I don't normally post things this mean-spirited but watching this thread unfold just kind of disgusted me. So many people ready to spout whatever bullshit pops into their minds, so FEW people who take a look at what's actually going on
Mod me down all you want. In this case I really, really very honestly don't care.
correction (Score:3, Informative)
I now think that when microsoft describes a company as "partner", they really mean "loss leader subsidiary" or "biatch".
Re:Radeon is supported by XFree86 team (Score:1, Informative)
i know the DRI-developers did not reverse engineer
the drivers but they did even get an already
running driver source package from ATI.
with this they had a quite nice jumpstart in
supporting specific adapters with only minor
effort. driver writers for other OS platforms
or for comercial drivers are of course keen
on the DRI drivers because they show them how
a working driver looks like - and they dont have
to order boards or sign code licenses theirselves.
in other words, what the dri developers do get
for free in return for their skilled works on
the topic (they cant and wont charge anyone for
the drivers) will have some a reasonable price
to other people that do have customers which
do pay them for their works.
in short - the dri people are supported with
a lots more than just a symbolic contribution.
and now start comparing with nVidia.
PS: if you think you should get serviced for
the Linux platform like it were the windows
platform, then please return back to your
windows "toy" and let the Linux OS develop
its own philosophy of service and support.
Re:possible answers? (Score:2, Informative)
Comment removed (Score:3, Informative)
Re:NVidia vs. ATI (Score:1, Informative)
I agree with that. The "advice" is utterly useless for 99.9% of people - too complicated. But - what if the poster had provided a shell script that downloaded the latest kernel, GLX and whatever and did the install?
Like this instead:
I have an installer for the nVidia drivers here: http://blahblah.com/linux/nvidia.sh [root@localhost]# ./nvidia.sh
This installer will download and set up Nvidia's drivers for Linux.
Checking dependencies...OK
Downloading missing dependency: Foo-3.4.5...OK
Downloading missing dependency: Bar-6.7.8...OK
Building new kernel with nVidia support...OK
Building new GLX with nVidia support...OK
Building new XFree86 with nVidia support...OK
Adding nvidia to your modules...OK
Starting nVidia drivers...OK
Completed! You should be able to type "startx" now and get nVidia accelerated X11!
Seriously - instead of rambling on in English what the poor user should do - say it in a language that matters: shell script. If you can't do so - because you don't know if the script will work yada yada - then your advice probably won't work either.
ATI website just changed! (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Opposite problem. (Score:2, Informative)
I have had to deal with this too - just manually install the winXP drivers and hope it dosn't break anything.
Re:x86 only (Score:3, Informative)
Open Firmware drivers (usually in the form of a Mac-specific firmware revision) are generally only needed for:
- drive interface cards (ATA, SCSI) if you are booting from them.
- video cards if you want Open Firmware to be able to use them at boot time (command-option-o-f).
- ethernet cards if you want to netboot your machine.
- anything else you want to use as a boot device unless Open Firmware has a built-in driver for it.
Basically if you want the device to be able to be controlled by the boot firmware (which isn't necessary to use the device once the OS has actually loaded), you need an OF driver. Otherwise, you don't.Re:ATi's Radeon 9700 and FireGL X1 are the same ca (Score:2, Informative)
They re-added em (Score:2, Informative)
hmm... (Score:3, Informative)
would someone check pefore posting this trash on slashdot's main page?
Re:Perhaps Matrox is the answer (or NVidia) (Score:1, Informative)
You are completely correct that on Linux binary drivers tend to break. The interesting thing is why this happens: Linux developers don't care about binary compatibility. They don't try to preserve it. And it's as simple as that.
Now, depending on your viewpoint, this is a good or a bad thing. If you only like open source, then hey, fuck binary only drivers (and live with the consequences or don't use them). If you're developing closed source binary drivers or you don't care about open source / closed source (eg, you just want something that works) your life is a pain in the ass.
For this to change either the open source zealots will win, and all software will be open sourced, or hardware manufacturers will decide they no longer need to keep drivers closed source. It doesn't look like other will change anytime soon.
Re:possible answers? (Score:2, Informative)
Bought a Radeon 8500 retail the day it came out. Installed stock drivers...worked okay, but lacking functionality, so I upgraded to the drivers on ATI's site.....boom, BSOD on Win2k.
Rebuilt the system for the hell of it, same exact problem.
Sold it to a friend running 98, those drivers were okay.
Terrible part is, I have a Sony G520 that looks amazing with an ATI card at 1600x1200 at 85hz, but if I push my Ti200 past 60hz at the same resolution, all the pixels mush together. It's really striking and gets worse almost linearly as you increase the refresh rate. It's unreadable at decent refresh rates.
I may have to buy a matrox to regain the crisp 2d.
Re:Bzzzt - Nope (Score:2, Informative)
Since I never use Red Hat for gaming I just never looked. It was nice to be able to boot to Linux with 24bit options and screen sizes of up to 1280 x 1024.
What games do you play on your Linux box?