about the linux ATI proprietary drivers writers team - Hardware

This is a discussion on about the linux ATI proprietary drivers writers team - Hardware ; I would like to know whether it is normal that ATI releases proprietary drivers for linux that are quite a lot more buggy and a less fine than for windows? i've never seen any bug under windows, while the one ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: about the linux ATI proprietary drivers writers team

  1. about the linux ATI proprietary drivers writers team

    I would like to know whether it is normal that ATI releases proprietary
    drivers for linux that are quite a lot more buggy and a less fine than for
    windows?

    i've never seen any bug under windows, while the one for linux seems to be
    even less reliable than the open source one.

    the acceleration is really aweful in linux and why these drivers make the
    backlight flashing twice at the launch of the X window?
    this shortens the lifespan.

    under windows and with the open sourc driver for linux the backlight is
    switched off and switched on again only once at the start of the graphical
    interface or X window.

  2. Re: about the linux ATI proprietary drivers writers team

    > I would like to know whether it is normal that ATI releases proprietary
    > drivers for linux that are quite a lot more buggy and a less fine than for
    > windows?


    They are buggy. But they are specifically designed for odd distros like
    RedHat, and SuSE. Under debian, the one main issue I've had is that Mesa
    OpenGL library overrides the ATI one. Even when building debs from
    the ati installer, I still have to manually replace /usr/lib/libGL.so.1.2
    with the file from /usr/lib/fglrx/diversions/libGL.so.1.2.

    dpkg-divert --list | grep -i "fglrx"

    If you don't do this, then X uses the Mesa acceleration (software) to do
    the rendering.


    glxinfo | grep -i "direct"

    Should show:

    direct rendering: Yes


    glxinfo | grep -i "^opengl"

    Should show(or something like this):

    OpenGL vendor string: ATI Technologies Inc.
    OpenGL renderer string: ATI Radeon Xpress Series
    OpenGL version string: 2.1.7170 Release

    And NOT Mesa if you want DRI acceleration. And otherwise use the ATI
    drivers, and not the mesa ones.


    But I digress, they are buggy. Especially if you venture into things like
    xinerama. The main bug of late is that the cursor gets a little whacked.
    Unfortunately they are even buggier on newer versions of X. But seem a
    lot more stable / usable on the older versions of X.

    When I first started using the ATI drivers on my Radeon Xpress 200M 5595
    (PCIE) it would only work in 24 bit colors. And is otherwise picky about
    what options are in your xorg.conf. Which aticonfig is not very good at
    modifying IMO. But better than nothing I guess.

    With the radeon open source driver, I have more color modes and more
    resolution modes available for use. Under the ATI driver, I'm quite
    limited in those regards. Not that I've used the radeon driver lately.
    The main issue I had with the radeon driver was that the 3D acceleration
    was virtually non-existent. But it was nice to have more resolution modes
    available so things didn't get so stretched out when Cntrl+Alt+[+]-ing
    through the modes. This 1280x800 display is quite weird looking at some
    of the traditional resolutions. Anyway enough rambling.

    HTH

  3. Re: about the linux ATI proprietary drivers writers team

    On 2008-01-27, heavytull wrote:
    > I would like to know whether it is normal that ATI releases proprietary
    > drivers for linux that are quite a lot more buggy and a less fine than for
    > windows?

    Of course that's normal. Simple matter of numbers.
    They have *much* more Windows users, so they'll get much more feedback and
    bug reports.

    > the acceleration is really aweful in linux and why these drivers make the
    > backlight flashing twice at the launch of the X window?
    > this shortens the lifespan.

    Huh?
    Worries about acceleration, I can understand.
    But having a flash at the start of X. Why would you care about that, unless
    you're starting and stopping X all the time?


    --
    There is an art, it says, or rather, a knack to flying.
    The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.
    Douglas Adams

  4. Re: about the linux ATI proprietary drivers writers team

    On 2008-01-28, Shadow_7 wrote:

    >> I would like to know whether it is normal that ATI releases proprietary
    >> drivers for linux that are quite a lot more buggy and a less fine than for
    >> windows?

    >
    > They are buggy. But they are specifically designed for odd distros like
    > RedHat, and SuSE.

    Odd distro's ?

    Please...

    > When I first started using the ATI drivers on my Radeon Xpress 200M 5595
    > (PCIE) it would only work in 24 bit colors.

    I see. You'd be the kin of person that find CD sound to low of quality, too?

    > The main issue I had with the radeon driver was that the 3D acceleration
    > was virtually non-existent. But it was nice to have more resolution modes
    > available so things didn't get so stretched out when Cntrl+Alt+[+]-ing
    > through the modes.

    Out of sincere curiousity: do you change the resolution that often? Why?

    --
    There is an art, it says, or rather, a knack to flying.
    The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.
    Douglas Adams

  5. Re: about the linux ATI proprietary drivers writers team

    On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 09:57:03 +0100, Rikishi 42 wrote:

    > On 2008-01-28, Shadow_7 wrote:
    >
    >>> I would like to know whether it is normal that ATI releases proprietary
    >>> drivers for linux that are quite a lot more buggy and a less fine than for
    >>> windows?

    >>
    >> They are buggy. But they are specifically designed for odd distros like
    >> RedHat, and SuSE.


    > Odd distro's ?
    >
    > Please...


    Yes, odd. As in the tldp.org need not apply. Since they've moved or
    renamed things, or otherwise scripted them to death.


    >> When I first started using the ATI drivers on my Radeon Xpress 200M
    >> 5595 (PCIE) it would only work in 24 bit colors.


    > I see. You'd be the kin of person that find CD sound to low of quality,
    > too?


    Actually I do find CD quality sound too low. But I'm a trombonist and
    like my trombone to sound more like a trombone than a synthesizer. But in
    term of video, I prefer 16 bit so I get better performance. I'm a little
    color deficient so it's not like I'm gonna miss a few million colors that
    the monitor couldn't accurately reproduce anyway.


    >> The main issue I had with the radeon driver was that the 3D
    >> acceleration was virtually non-existent. But it was nice to have more
    >> resolution modes available so things didn't get so stretched out when
    >> Cntrl+Alt+[+]-ing through the modes.


    > Out of sincere curiousity: do you change the resolution that often? Why?


    Because firefox doesn't come with a zoom feature (that I know of). So
    when someone posts a fairly low res picture of themselves or some alumni,
    I can Cntrl+Alt+[+] to zoom in on the pic. Otherwise I'm looking at
    something the size of a postage stamp, or desktop icon. Using a change
    in resolution to zoom is easier/quicker than having to save as and
    open it in a picture viewer capable of zooming. Plus when I'm checking
    email first thing in the morning and my eyes aren't quite focused yet,
    it's nice to make the thing bigger without having the bring the lcd of the
    laptop within 5"'s of my face. Or restart X with a different dpi setting.
    And then there's pogo.com with their 640x### java applets, that are just
    to small to play well without zooming in. And minesweeper in expert mode
    that suffers a similar fate.

    Since you asked.

  6. Re: about the linux ATI proprietary drivers writers team

    Shadow_7 writes:
    >With the radeon open source driver, I have more color modes and more
    >resolution modes available for use. Under the ATI driver, I'm quite
    >limited in those regards. Not that I've used the radeon driver lately.
    >The main issue I had with the radeon driver was that the 3D acceleration
    >was virtually non-existent.


    What graphics card are you using? The last status I know is that the
    radeon driver has 3D acceleration for all the cards it supports, and
    on the cards I have tried (Radeon 9250, 9600, 9600Pro, X550, X800GTO,
    X850XT) it works nicely, although slower than the Windows driver (see
    <2006Dec15.202458@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>
    <2007Feb2.184806@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>).

    - anton
    --
    M. Anton Ertl Some things have to be seen to be believed
    anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at Most things have to be believed to be seen
    http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/home.html

  7. Re: about the linux ATI proprietary drivers writers team

    On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 10:48:40 GMT, Anton Ertl wrote:

    > What graphics card are you using? The last status I know is that the
    > radeon driver has 3D acceleration for all the cards it supports,


    Not well enough in my case.
    RS480 [Radeon Xpress 200G Series] (on board)
    Module: ATI Radeon 9500 - X850

    Flightgear is useless under the new drivers. Mandriva release 2007.1
    proprietary driver worked pretty good.

  8. Re: about the linux ATI proprietary drivers writers team

    >> What graphics card are you using? The last status I know is that the
    >> radeon driver has 3D acceleration for all the cards it supports,

    >
    > Not well enough in my case.
    > RS480 [Radeon Xpress 200G Series] (on board)
    > Module: ATI Radeon 9500 - X850
    >
    > Flightgear is useless under the new drivers. Mandriva release 2007.1
    > proprietary driver worked pretty good.


    For me ATI Radeon XPRESS 200M 5955 (PCIE) and the fglrx driver. Aside from
    some MSI quirk thing so PCIe doesn't seem usable. Not that a mention of
    MSI can be found in ATI's expanded driver pack. So it probably doesn't
    support PCIe anyway. Anyway the radeon driver did not support 3D
    acceleration for it as of late 2006. Some odd r300 or r400-ish chipset.
    I haven't checked lately, but up until recently my ATI drivers really
    fowled things up. And I wasn't able to successfully revert to the radeon
    driver. Some details below.

    One recent upgrade issue I had with the ATI drivers was that things got
    moved around. Some /etc/fglrx... files were overriding the newer
    /etc/ati/... files. And some /usr/lib/xorg/... files were overriding the
    newer files in other locations. Granted that I used to install via non
    distro specific means and had to revert to distro specific means when the
    ati installer started failing to run in a non distro specific manner.
    i.e. locked up the computer on one of the prompts. Although that might
    be because I tried to upgrade to a 64 bit linux on a box which turns out is
    NOT fully 64 bit.

    I was eventually able to get it working again after about three months of
    using the vesa driver at 1024x768 on my 1280x800 LCD. Quite anoying I
    might add. But I had to otherwise move/remove a number of files. The
    list below. Basically follow the remove old packages methodology before
    installing new packages. Because the ATI drivers are NOT self cleaning.
    So waiting through a number of new driver releases was not enough to fix
    the issue in this case.

    The remnants manually removed. Now I still got a cpu race condition if I
    ran java applets with sound enabled. Which stopped when I disabled sound
    which was designed into the applet(s). i.e. pogo.com even after moving
    these files. But I could get 1280x800 again. And DRI again, to a limited
    extent.

    /etc/fglrxprofiles.csv
    /etc/fglrxrc
    /usr/lib/xorg/libatixutil.a
    /usr/lib/xorg/libfglrx_dm.a
    /usr/lib/xorg/libfglrx_dm.so.1.0
    /usr/lib/xorg/libfglrx_gamma.a
    /usr/lib/xorg/libfglrx_gamma.so.1
    /usr/lib/xorg/libfglrx_gamma.so.1.0
    /usr/lib/xorg/libfglrx_pp.a
    /usr/lib/xorg/libfglrx_pp.so.1.0
    /usr/lib/xorg/libfglrx_tvout.a
    /usr/lib/xorg/libfglrx_tvout.so.1
    /usr/lib/xorg/libfglrx_tvout.so.1.0
    /usr/lib/xorg/libGL.so
    /usr/lib/xorg/libGL.so.1
    /usr/lib/xorg/libGL.so.1.2

    Basically these existed in multiple locations. And the ones above had the
    oldest date/time stamps. Being 2006 in my case while fixing the issue in
    late 2007. Not to imply that they are the only remnants. But I
    identified them and removed them, and was able to get the ati drivers
    usable again.

    In the meantime I have 1.1G's of .debs downloaded for my new install.
    With probably a gig or more left to download over dialup. In order to
    make my new install (debian/stable) up to par with my old install
    (debian/unstable). At least in terms of the number of and the name of
    packages installed. Most every game plus every development tool
    available. Thank god for shell scripts. Set it and forget it.

    I somehow got this list from dpkg-divert. Which helped me identify that I
    was using the wrong libGL.so.1.2 file for ATI. Perhaps I should check
    some of the others. But I remembered that I had to play with libGL.so.1.2
    anyway from my previous attempts to get DRI from the ATI drivers working
    about a year earlier when I got this new laptop and set it up.

    libatixutil.a
    libfglrx_dm.a
    libfglrx_dm.so.1.0
    libfglrx_gamma.a
    libfglrx_gamma.so.1
    libfglrx_gamma.so.1.0
    libfglrx_pp.a
    libfglrx_pp.so.1.0
    libfglrx_tvout.a
    libfglrx_tvout.so.1
    libfglrx_tvout.so.1.0
    libGL.so
    libGL.so.1
    libGL.so.1.2

    NOTE: You have to undo any changes to libGL.so.2.1 to get the radeon driver
    working again. Needless to say I've adopted a policy of moving files
    instead of removing them these days. With a slight modification in file
    name to reflect their original paths. And maybe a date/time and a reason
    why I moved them. So I have these in my main users home directory.

    usr_lib_fglrx_diversions_libGL.so.1.2___FGLRX
    usr_lib_libGL.so.1.2____________________MESA

    HTH

  9. Monitor Problems Re: about the linux ATI proprietary driverswriters team


    Sorry to change the direction of this thread. I've posted my problem
    before, but I got no answers to it.

    The problem is with the LCD Monitor and when I boot up the PC it
    remains dark, after the OS (Ubuntu Studio 7.10) is up and running I
    get a log-in, I can also switch to the console (Ctrl+Alt+FX 1-6) but
    the fonts are huge about 10 mm high, this means that vim for example
    displays 22 lines.

    Using Gnome (but mostly XFCE) I get a bunch of vertical lines about
    half of the monitor, from the bottom up.

    Now I took some screen-shots with gimp, and lo and behold, on the
    pictures taken there are no such lines to be seen, (looked at them
    on another PC with another OS on it.

    How does it work that gimp takes a picture of the screen, but it
    doesn't capture the fault?



    Dragomir Kollaric
    --
    Q: Do you know what the death-rate around here is?
    A: One per person!

  10. Re: Monitor Problems Re: about the linux ATI proprietary driverswriters team

    > The problem is with the LCD Monitor and when I boot up the PC it
    > remains dark, after the OS (Ubuntu Studio 7.10) is up and running I
    > get a log-in, I can also switch to the console (Ctrl+Alt+FX 1-6) but
    > the fonts are huge about 10 mm high, this means that vim for example
    > displays 22 lines.


    If it remains blank on a console, you probably enabled the framebuffer,
    but didn't include or load the modules at boot time.

    If it remains blank in X, then your X is misconfigured. Or you're using
    the wrong video driver. Or possibly the video driver sucks. Or your
    HorizSync and VertRefresh values are off in your X configuration.

    # X -configure
    # X -config /root/xorg.conf.new
    # cp /root/xorg.conf.new /etc/X11/xorg.conf
    # aticonfig --initial (and some other options, google for your card)
    # X -config /etc/X11/xorg.conf
    (if all is well exit to your user and startx)
    NOTE: Cntrl+Alt+Backspace to exit X.
    (assuming it's responding and the keyboard didn't flake out on you)

    > Using Gnome (but mostly XFCE) I get a bunch of vertical lines about half
    > of the monitor, from the bottom up.


    Sounds like X or your video driver is misconfigured. Check
    /var/log/Xorg.0.log for any details to shed some light on it for you.
    I've had that happen myself. Gimp grabs the right stuff because it's
    talking to X and the problem exists between X and your video card. Not
    between X and your applications / processes. Sort of the same way screen
    shots don't work if your media player is using your accelerated drivers,
    but does work if you output using x11/shm.

    HTH

  11. Re: about the linux ATI proprietary drivers writers team

    On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 10:42:46 +0000, Shadow_7 wrote:

    > Because firefox doesn't come with a zoom feature (that I know of).


    You just don't know where to look I suppose. Try this addons search:

    https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/fir...=zoom&status=4

    Enjoy!
    Gene (e-mail: gene \a\t eracc \d\o\t com)
    --
    Mandriva Linux release 2007.1 (Official) for i586
    Got Rute? http://www.anrdoezrs.net/email-25465...sbn=0130333514
    ERA Computers & Consulting - http://www.eracc.com/
    Preloaded PCs - eComStation, Linux, FreeBSD, OpenServer & UnixWare

  12. Re: about the linux ATI proprietary drivers writers team

    On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:48:45 +0000, ERACC wrote:

    > On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 10:42:46 +0000, Shadow_7 wrote:
    >
    >> Because firefox doesn't come with a zoom feature (that I know of).

    >
    > You just don't know where to look I suppose. Try this addons search:
    >
    > https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/fir...=zoom&status=4
    >
    > Enjoy!
    > Gene (e-mail: gene \a\t eracc \d\o\t com)


    Well, I haven't had much of a need to look for that since linux / X already
    has a built in zoom (Cntrl + Alt + [+/-]). Sure I could address it on a
    per application basis. But it's just a lot more convenient to switch
    resolution modes on the fly.

    And that plugin doesn't work for sylpheed, gimp(has it own zoom, not a
    plugin), mplayer (yeah, I know of -vf scale -zoom -x ### -y ###). For the
    pogo games in question, it's not the text I need bigger. And it's not
    quite good enough to go 2x's for 800px on a 1280px wide LCD. So having
    various resolutions to bump through helps. If your video driver supports
    it.

    And there's also the matter of aspect ratio(8:5 for 1280x800 aka 1.6)
    as opposed to (4:3 for 1024x768 aka 1.33) which can be corrected in some
    video modes. Without having to jump through additional hoops.

  13. Re: about the linux ATI proprietary drivers writers team

    Bit Twister writes:
    >On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 10:48:40 GMT, Anton Ertl wrote:
    >
    >> What graphics card are you using? The last status I know is that the
    >> radeon driver has 3D acceleration for all the cards it supports,

    >
    >Not well enough in my case.
    >RS480 [Radeon Xpress 200G Series] (on board)
    >Module: ATI Radeon 9500 - X850
    >
    >Flightgear is useless under the new drivers.


    Yes, I have tried this now on an X850XT, and it gets maybe 0.4fps. I
    have also tried it on my 9250, and that gets around 30fps with the
    default settings (and in 1600x1200 full screen). With the X850XT the
    r300 subdriver warns about supporting some feature only in software; I
    guess that's the reason for the slowdown (the 9250 uses the R200
    subdriver). Maybe that problem is fixed in a newer version; I'm using
    the versions included with Debian Etch (Mesa DRI R300 20060815 TCL;
    for the 9250 the DRI driver is Mesa DRI R200 20060602 AGP 4x TCL), and
    apparently not in the version included with your Mandriva 2007.1
    distro.

    - anton
    --
    M. Anton Ertl Some things have to be seen to be believed
    anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at Most things have to be believed to be seen
    http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/home.html

  14. Re: about the linux ATI proprietary drivers writers team

    I demand that Anton Ertl may or may not have written...

    > Bit Twister writes:
    >> On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 10:48:40 GMT, Anton Ertl wrote:
    >>> What graphics card are you using? The last status I know is that the
    >>> radeon driver has 3D acceleration for all the cards it supports,

    >> Not well enough in my case.
    >> RS480 [Radeon Xpress 200G Series] (on board)
    >> Module: ATI Radeon 9500 - X850
    >> Flightgear is useless under the new drivers.


    > Yes, I have tried this now on an X850XT, and it gets maybe 0.4fps. I have
    > also tried it on my 9250, and that gets around 30fps with the default
    > settings (and in 1600x1200 full screen). With the X850XT the r300
    > subdriver warns about supporting some feature only in software; I guess
    > that's the reason for the slowdown (the 9250 uses the R200 subdriver).


    For R300, it's a good idea to use driconf to switch on the "disable
    low-impact fallbacks" option (if you can). There's an image at
    http://dri.freedesktop.org/wiki/ATIRadeon which shows a few other settings,
    coincidentally for use with flightgear (though the top one's hidden).

    > Maybe that problem is fixed in a newer version; I'm using the versions
    > included with Debian Etch (Mesa DRI R300 20060815 TCL; for the 9250 the DRI
    > driver is Mesa DRI R200 20060602 AGP 4x TCL),


    I get that same R300 string here, despite the fact that what I'm using is
    recent testing/unstable. (

    [snip]
    --
    | Darren Salt | linux or ds at | nr. Ashington, | Toon
    | RISC OS, Linux | youmustbejoking,demon,co,uk | Northumberland | Army
    |

    I call my computer Hole in the Desk

  15. Re: about the linux ATI proprietary drivers writers team

    Darren Salt writes:
    >I demand that Anton Ertl may or may not have written...
    >
    >> Bit Twister writes:
    >>> On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 10:48:40 GMT, Anton Ertl wrote:
    >>>> What graphics card are you using? The last status I know is that the
    >>>> radeon driver has 3D acceleration for all the cards it supports,
    >>> Not well enough in my case.
    >>> RS480 [Radeon Xpress 200G Series] (on board)
    >>> Module: ATI Radeon 9500 - X850
    >>> Flightgear is useless under the new drivers.

    >
    >> Yes, I have tried this now on an X850XT, and it gets maybe 0.4fps. I have
    >> also tried it on my 9250, and that gets around 30fps with the default
    >> settings (and in 1600x1200 full screen). With the X850XT the r300
    >> subdriver warns about supporting some feature only in software; I guess
    >> that's the reason for the slowdown (the 9250 uses the R200 subdriver).

    >
    >For R300, it's a good idea to use driconf to switch on the "disable
    >low-impact fallbacks" option (if you can).


    I have now tried that on the box with the X850XT, and can report
    success. Flightgear now gets 27-42fps and is playable on that box.

    >There's an image at
    >http://dri.freedesktop.org/wiki/ATIRadeon which shows a few other settings,
    >coincidentally for use with flightgear (though the top one's hidden).


    The numbers above are just with "disable low-impact fallbacks".

    - anton
    --
    M. Anton Ertl Some things have to be seen to be believed
    anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at Most things have to be believed to be seen
    http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/home.html

+ Reply to Thread