Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

AMD Launches New ATI Linux Driver

Posted by kdawson on Wed Sep 05, 2007 09:07 AM
from the soon-it-will-all-be-faster dept.
Michael Larabel writes "AMD has issued a press release announcing 'significant graphics performance and compatibility enhancements' on Linux. AMD will be delivering new ATI Linux drivers this year that offer ATI Radeon HD 2000 series support, AIGLX support (Beryl and Compiz), and major performance improvements. At Phoronix we have been testing these new drivers internally for the past few weeks and have a number of articles looking at this new driver. The ATI 8.41 Linux driver delivers Linux gaming improvements from the R300/400 series and the R500 series. The inaugural Radeon HD 2900XT series support also can be found in the new ATI Linux driver with 'the best price/performance ratio of any high-end graphics card under Linux.' While this new driver cannot be downloaded yet, in their press release AMD also alludes to accelerating efforts with the open-source community."
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] AMD To Open ATI Specs 426 comments
Several readers tipped us the followup of yesterday's AMD/ATI news, the new development hinted at by Phoronix: AMD has announced they are releasing the specs for all new Radeon chipsets, and will be working with the open source community to develop a fully functional 2D and 3D graphics driver. An anonymous reader opines: "AMD appears to be following in Intel's footsteps with upcoming releases. If AMD is successful NVidia will have real competition in the GNU/Linux gaming arena. While past support by ATI was unsatisfactory the new AMD buyout appears to be having some effect."
[+] ATI Releases AIGLX Linux Driver 113 comments
Michael writes "A month after AMD released a Radeon HD 2000 'R600' Linux driver based on their new Linux driver codebase, they have now released another driver that provides AIGLX support used for Compiz and Compiz Fusion. In addition to this long-awaited AIGLX support, this driver also addresses issues with previous Radeon product families, performance improvements, AGP fixes, and added features to their graphical control panel. Phoronix has a review of the 8.42 Linux driver with all of the details about this much-anticipated release."
[+] AMD's New Card Supports Linux From the Get-Go 352 comments
Michael writes "Back in September AMD had announced a new ATI Linux driver as well as opening up their GPU specifications, and today they have taken an additional step to better support the Linux OS. With the just-announced Radeon HD 4850 RV770 they have provided same-day Linux support, and the Linux driver is now shipping alongside the Windows driver on their product CDs. In addition, they are encouraging their AIB partners to showcase Tux on the product packaging as a sign of Linux support. Last but certainly not least, AMD is committed from top-to-bottom product support on Linux and they will be introducing high-end features in their Linux driver such as MultiGPU CrossFire technology. Phoronix has a run-down on AMD's evolutionary leap in Linux support along with information on the open-source support for the RV770 GPU."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Put up or shut up... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by MMC Monster (602931) on Wednesday September 05 2007, @09:11AM (#20478947)
    Really, it's not that I like nvidia. But I've been hearing reports on /. since the beginning of the year of ATI linux drivers coming soon. How about we wait until they're actually release before bothering to give them any support.
    • by Prof.Phreak (584152) on Wednesday September 05 2007, @11:20AM (#20480983) Homepage
      Amen. Same for AMD in general. Come on... actually release -SOMETHING-!
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      Ditto. I am a FreeBSD users. There are no drivers for newer ATI cards on FreeBSD, because ATI refuses to open source their drivers. I have been hearing rumours of open source drivers for a year now, but nothing. At LWCE the AMD guys said we would see some imminently, but nothing.

      I am building a new system in the next month or two, and if ATI still hasn't come out with open source drivers, I'm going with Intel instead.
  • Are they open? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by MarcQuadra (129430) on Wednesday September 05 2007, @09:13AM (#20479003) Journal
    They're useless to me unless the source is available, preferably under the GPL. I really wish they'd work -inside- the framework of the kernel, Mesa, and xorg projects instead of building one-off binary drivers. What if I want to use their card on PowerPC, want to link against the latest (or a non-mainline) kernel, or just want to run an all-open system?
    • Re:Are they open? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by gmack (197796) <gmack&innerfire,net> on Wednesday September 05 2007, @09:19AM (#20479107) Homepage Journal
      Right now I would settle for a driver that works on recent kernels since one of those improvements mean much to me if I can't actually install them.

      I used to be a huge ATI fan but I've completely stopped buying their stuff. If they can't be bothered to make working drivers or have useful support answers. I can't be bothered to shell out money for something that's just going into the garbage bin anyways.

      NVIDIA is marginally better.. at least these stuff works even if I have to reinstall the X.org drivers every time I update a kernel.
    • Re:Are they open? (Score:5, Informative)

      by corvair2k1 (658439) on Wednesday September 05 2007, @09:35AM (#20479315)
      NVIDIA has long since had a handle on your "latest/nonstandard kernel" problem. It builds its own interfaces to conform to the kernel's.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      What if I want to use their card on PowerPC, want to link against the latest (or a non-mainline) kernel, or just want to run an all-open system?

      On a related note: does anyone know if it's possible to get standalone graphics cards with Intel 3D graphics hardware on them?

      I know that on an absolute scale, the Intel chipsets aren't particularly fast... but they're certainly faster than the Radeon 9600 mobility I've got right now, and there are genuinely open source accelerated drivers for them. Which means

      • AFAIK, Intel graphics chips only come on motherboards with Intel chipsets, which only handle Intel processors.

        See a pattern here?
        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          See a pattern here?

          Yep, a strong pattern indeed. Intel is saying, "Buy an Intel processor," whereas AMD is saying, "Buy an Intel processor." Anyone who can't spot the pattern in that, has to be pretty dense. I wonder why AMD's stockholders haven't noticed it.

    • Re:Are they open? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by TheRaven64 (641858) on Wednesday September 05 2007, @10:08AM (#20479791) Homepage Journal

      They're useless to me unless the source is available, preferably under the GPL.
      Out of interest, why GPL? The rest of DRI (and x.org) is MIT licensed, including the Intel drivers. The only parts that are GPL'd are the kernel modules (which do a small amount of validation and pass instructions to the hardware). Keeping the majority of the drivers MIT licensed makes it much easier for people to add support for other operating systems, such as FreeBSD and Solaris (both of which are supported by nVidias blobs, although only FreeBSD has good support for Intel chips since no one has ported DRI to Solaris yet).
      • Re:Are they open? (Score:4, Insightful)

        by howlingmadhowie (943150) on Wednesday September 05 2007, @12:06PM (#20481629)
        if they documented the interface, they wouldn't have to support it. someone else would do the work.
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          But seriously, how many PPC workstations get sold nowadays?
          Especially ones with slots able to take new videocards...
          It's such a small niche that it's probably not worth it for AMD to pursue.
            • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

              The same applies to Sparc, ARM, Power-and-siblings, and a half-dozen others that I can't be bothered to name. Not all of these are out of mainstream production...

              I hate to break it to you, but you're using a very non-standard definition of "mainstream."

  • by Lumpy (12016) on Wednesday September 05 2007, @09:14AM (#20479021) Homepage
    I purchase Nvidia only because the cards actually work under linux, or they used to. Lately there are issues...

    If AMD steps up to the plate and gives us good drivers and actually listens and reacts fast to reported problems, they can come out way ahead.

    Nvidia driver install used to be painless, now it can be incredibly painful depending on the Distro and Card you have. I still cant get a old Geforce4 card working on my wifes ubuntu PC. I gave up and switched to the intel onboard chipset. Far better support for that video chipset than nvidia is giving us even for the older cards that USED to work great.
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      at the risk of being offtopic:

      with Ubuntu you have a choice of three different NVidia drivers; new, normal, and legacy. you should probably use normal 'nvidia-kernel-' & 'nvidia-glx-'. if, on the other hand, you have a brand spanking new card, you will need the beta drivers direct from nvidia and you will have to install them yourself. in the event you choose to go that road do *not* install the linux-restricted-stuff - it will interfere with the drivers, and remember to re-install the drivers from reco
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        Um no 3d, no Xv acceleration, makes it useless to even have a video card outside the built in cheapie no 3d no acceleration anything card.

        nv driver is good for install or limp mode only.
      • by Zonk (troll) (1026140) on Wednesday September 05 2007, @09:42AM (#20479399)

        What's wrong with the i-tal "nv" driver? Never installed nVidious's closed-source crap, never likely to.
        It's 2d only. Ie, no Beryl/Compiz. It also doesn't seem to be very stable. I use that driver on my PowerBook (it runs Ubuntu), but X freezes half of the time I try to play a video*. If I'm at home I have to ssh in from another machine and kill X so I can use the thing again, or if I'm anywhere else I have to reboot (keyboard and mouse are frozen as is everything on the desktop, ctrl-alt-backspace doesn't do anything).

        * It doesn't matter whether I'm using VLC, Xine, Mplayer, or Totem. I happens very often, which is why I'll usually just boot it into OS X if I want to play a dvd or avi.

        Also, in reply to Lumpy (gp), why is it so hard to go to "System->Administration->Restricted Drivers Manager"? I've done that with a few GeForce4 (integrated) cards and it's as easy as typing your password and clicking a button.

        If you're not running 7.04, then just do "System->Administration->Synaptic Package Manager" and do a search for "nvidia-glx". Install that and it should work (you might have to change /etc/X11/xorg.conf to "nvidia" rather than "nv", I don't remember if that's automatic or not).

        Ubuntu is by far the easiest distro to install 3d graphics drivers on since they provide the packages. No compiling and it will always work across reboots since the driver gets updated when the kernel does.
        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          If I'm at home I have to ssh in from another machine and kill X so I can use the thing again, or if I'm anywhere else I have to reboot (keyboard and mouse are frozen as is everything on the desktop, ctrl-alt-backspace doesn't do anything).
          Next time try Alt+Print_Screen+K (search for Raising Skinny Elephants is Utterly Boring at the wikipedia [wikipedia.org])
  • by Trelane (16124) on Wednesday September 05 2007, @09:17AM (#20479065) Journal
    It's only been 3-4 years since I bought an ATI card in the (vain) hopes that they would continue supporting X devs. Sadly, I found poor support and lots of bugs. Unless they pull an Intel and release/fund Free drivers for their graphics chips, for me it's Intel for ease-of-use and NVidia for performance. I've lost faith in them.
  • by erroneus (253617) on Wednesday September 05 2007, @09:38AM (#20479347) Homepage
    In previous discussions about ATI and their Linux driver support, I had mentioned that I made the bold move to move away from ATI on my laptop to nVidia. (Dell makes these kinds of changes fairly easy) My laptop is an Inspiron 8600 which I had originally ordered to use the ATI Mobility 9600 card. Through eBay, I ordered and later installed the 128MB version of the nVidia card to replace it. (Not terribly expensive either.) I just checked AMD/ATI's web site to see what the current hardware supported under the current driver is. Sure enough, my mobility 9600 is now at the very bottom of the supported hardware list and with the new release, it is certain to fall off entirely.

    If it hasn't been stated clearly enough in the past, I'll state it again. Even if you don't care about whether a driver is OSS or proprietary from a technical standpoint, users are advised to understand that proprietary drivers places control over your hardware's obsolescence firmly in the hands of the manufacturer. And these days, with limited hardware selection for things like laptops or very tiny PCs, your options are pretty limited. These proprietary drivers are damaging the viability of Linux on older hardware which has been one of Linux's strongest motivators for adoption.

    Moving to nVidia helps because at least with nVidia, they have a legacy hardware program to support and update drivers for older hardware. AMD/ATI does not. Ultimately, though, I should probably settle in and get comfortable with the OSS drivers for my hardware even if the performance is lower... it's a damned shame though.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      I think the big problem is not that people don't understand the pitfalls of proprietary drivers. I think it's more that people buy hardware first, and opt to install an alt OS down the line. Aside from myself, I don't know anyone who was careful to purchase a computer that would be well supported by anything other than Windows.

      The net result is that a LOT of people end up with ATI video cards, not wanting to buy replacements, and aggravated that driver support sucks. It's a crappy situation all the way a
  • by AHuxley (892839) on Wednesday September 05 2007, @09:45AM (#20479451)
    Please try and support The Open Graphics Project.
    http://wiki.opengraphics.org./tiki-index.php?page= AboutOpenGraphics [wiki.opengraphics.org]
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      If you want Linux and open, you can use Intel's graphics chips right now. They have opensource drivers in the stable kernel and X.org trees. If you need badass performance for the latest games, I don't think OGP will be much better than Intel. But for example, my oldish Centrino laptop runs things like Tuxracer and Quake 3 smoothly, so the basic 3D stuff definitely works.

      On the other hand, I do appreciate a good hardware hack, but that's a completely different realm from most Linux geeks' needs. A compl

  • by theMAGE (51991) on Wednesday September 05 2007, @10:00AM (#20479661)
    The title is misleading - AMD did not launch anything, they announced it. Just the fact that some random hardware site got a sneak peek at the driver does not change anything...
  • by DirkGently (32794) <dirk@lemonge c k o.org> on Wednesday September 05 2007, @10:02AM (#20479707) Homepage
    I didn't see any word about MPEG2/MPEG4 offloading, or even word of proper Xv support/controls. I've got my fingers crossed, but for those of us who live & breathe MythTV [mythtv.org], I fear it's still a one-horse town.
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      fglrx currently has Xv acceleration using the GPU on R500 series cards, and it works well enough that I can watch 1080p H.264 content with no dropped frames. It's the one (and only) thing it currently beats the Nvidia drivers on.

  • by TheGreatOrangePeel (618581) on Wednesday September 05 2007, @10:24AM (#20480027) Homepage
    What the hell is up with all the scathing remarks?! Let's remember that the ATI acquisition by AMD is new and let's be impressed, considering past support, that progress is being made in the Linux ATI drivers arena AT ALL! I really do believe that AMD is going to do the right thing by Linux. They're two underdogs that stand a lot to gain from each other and it would only stand to hurt any gains to be had by such a relationship by continuing what ATI was doing before the buyout. The fact of the matter is, ATI has undoubtedly undergone a mass re-organization and is, doubtlessly, also operating under a new philosophy. Anyone who knows someone who had their division bought out knows this to be true. Let's just sit back and see what happens before we start (effectively) blaming AMD for ATI's past mistakes and poorly written code.
  • by xer.xes (4181) on Wednesday September 05 2007, @10:27AM (#20480073)
    It was announced today at the Linux summit they will open up specifications for all graphics cards, and release a 'reference'/minimal open-source driver for all cards.

    More here: http://lwn.net/Articles/248227 [lwn.net]
    • by chill (34294) on Wednesday September 05 2007, @10:35AM (#20480195) Journal
      All graphics cards from the R500 going forward, specifically.

      Still, THIS should be an article on Slashdot with the new drivers being a footnote -- not the other way around.
    • by lotho brandybuck (720697) on Wednesday September 05 2007, @10:40AM (#20480265) Homepage Journal
      That's huge. I hope this is true. I hope it's done fast.
      Available, truly open sourced drivers are going to be a big factor in any hardware purchase I make.
      I'm just one, but I think I'm one of many. Even if you're not "paranoid" (concerned) it's obsolecense protection.

    • by Kjella (173770) on Wednesday September 05 2007, @11:33AM (#20481165) Homepage
      That's excellent news, but I'm always weary of paper releases. When the specs are available for download, and someone with more driver writing skills than me has said "yep, this is a good and complete documentation that we can actually use" then it's time for celebration. Then maybe next time I'll cosider an ATI card, it's been a long time since last time.
  • by MrNemesis (587188) on Wednesday September 05 2007, @10:29AM (#20480099) Homepage Journal
    Since the beginning of the year? Hell, I've been hearing murmuring for years on "support for XYZ will be coming soon!" - and yet today the disparity between the ATI/nVidia feature set and stability under Linux are still huge. How long since nVidia got support for AIGLX? ATI only just adds it now?

    You'll also note that, GeForce 8x00 series notwithstanding (which are marginally slower under Linux), nVidia maintain a very small performance delta between the Linux and windows version of their drivers. ATI's performance delta can sometimes be as much as 50% (top-of-my-head BTW, Phoronix had another full-of-crappy-graphs article about it a while back).

    I'm hoping AMD can pull some weight and at least get better support for laptop chipsets and IGP's in their otherwise pretty nice chipsets. Until then, I have to stick to Intel or nVidia for graphics, and since I only need the one gaming box, I'm getting through alot of Intel motherboards. Guess what CPU goes in an Intel motherboard, AMD? Despite me wanting to use X2's for their lower idle power envelope, I find it hard to justify.

    Sigh.
  • It's about time! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by WhiteWolf666 (145211) <moornblade at gmail.com> on Wednesday September 05 2007, @10:53AM (#20480497) Homepage Journal
    Awesome!

    Even though its not "out" yet, there are plenty of benchmarks available. It'll be out soon.

    What does this "prove" for me? That AMD's commitment to make ATI a first-class contender on the Linux front was for real. I'm guessing that Windows users will also see improvements in OpenGL performance, and we'll see better adoption of OpenGL on all three major platforms (Windows, OS X, Linux).

    I'm happy as hell about this. About time us Linux users got to take advantage of GPU price wars!

    I'm still an NVIDIA fan, because they've been good to me for all these years (on Linux), but I'm at least willing to look at ATI these days; particularly because the ATI peripheral GPU software is much better (better control panel, better install program). I wonder if the driver quality is good (not just performance, but does it always compile correctly, does it always fix broken installs (the way NVIDIA's does?)).

    This is a good day for Linux.
  • Pathetic (Score:5, Funny)

    by BlueParrot (965239) on Wednesday September 05 2007, @11:54AM (#20481455)
    So... I don't even bother trying the fglrx drivers since the reverse engineered free driver is more stable, and actually works. I mean seriously ATI, a non-profit project which bases its code on guessing how your hardware works has not only better, but in some cases superior, stability than your shitty driver, that really says something. I think it is time for a bad car analogy. Imagine a driver who memorises the layout of the town by carefully noting down where his car crashes as he drives. This guy's taxi company is currently beating your top of the line staff, even thou you have a full map of the town, a military grade GPS receiver, and real-time information about traffic congestion. Oh, and btw, your competitor's car has opaque windows, can only use the reverse gear and he is only able to turn left. Even so, the customers prefer him in front of you. In short: You suck! Big time...
    • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 05 2007, @09:12AM (#20478963)
      Here, you dropped your tinfoil hat.
      • 98% of all Linux machines are used for tasks where 3D graphic performance doesn't matter.

        Wrong. Many Linux machines are now desktops. 2/3 of the Linux machines in my home are desktops. I don't use fancy 3D desktops, but I do use everyday apps like Google Earth and the occasional kids' games that are much faster and smoother with hardware rather than software OpenGL.

        However I have solved this problem by only buying Intel graphics hardware. They work from the moment Fedora first boots up.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          Intel graphics are also shit compared to Nvidia or ATI.

          Also, I don't think your number "prove" most linux installs are desktops. Many probably still are just servers.
          • by CastrTroy (595695) on Wednesday September 05 2007, @10:22AM (#20479989) Homepage
            Yes they are. But once you bring driver quality and stability into the equation, then Intel wins hands down. I'd rather have a slower video card that actually works, than a fast one that doesn't. Also, unless you are playing games, you won't notice the speed difference. Even if you're running a 3D desktop.
            • by Afrosheen (42464) on Wednesday September 05 2007, @10:35AM (#20480207)
              "I'd rather have a slower video card that actually works, than a fast one that doesn't"

              That's why nearly all Linux gamers and more than 60% of Windows gamers buy Nvidia cards. They've had better drivers for ages. Not open source, which disturbs some of the hardcore, but great drivers nonetheless.
            • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

              I agree, but for some reason you've ruled out Nvidia. Great drivers and a fast card. ATI is the only company that thinks its ok to put out shitty graphics drivers.
            • I'd say Intel is worse shit than even ATI (which I detest). Out of the two Intel systems at work, neither will work outside of frame buffer mode, and worse than that, they cannot run at the native resolution of the LCD monitor.

              The nVidia drivers just plain work. They detected the monitor correctly and have worked flawlessly ever since. Open or close source, they are by far the best drivers I've used. The ATI drivers I use on one of the machines support the monitors, but introduce periodic 2-D corruption when running Xemacs and corrupt the cursor when moving between Xinerama panes, but at least they can do 1680x1050 and Xinerama. I don't even mind that the 3-D is slow since this is a work machine and I don't really need 3-D.

              The Intel drivers are far too slow at 2-D, and given I can only do 1280x1024 or 1600x1200 and both look like crap on the LCD monitors. One machine is a P-4 and the other a core 2 duo machine, and both are unusable with Intel.

              I only want 2-D and the Intel drivers can't even do that right.

              Also with nVidia, I don't really even need to care which chipset is used as long as it isn't too old, since the drivers just work. Even the open source nVidia drivers work well for 2-D.
      • by CastrTroy (595695) on Wednesday September 05 2007, @09:54AM (#20479573) Homepage
        Exactly. I got a laptop with an Intel GMA. Not a powerful video chip, but it has enough power to do all that 3D desktop stuff. And there was no fuss getting drivers. No extra stuff to download. No configuration to do. Everything just worked. For all my new computers (for the foreseeable future, until other graphics cards manufacturers release good open source drivers), they will all be using Intel GMA, because these video chips are good enough for my uses, and the drivers are extremely solid. If I want to play video games, I'll use my console (Wii).
        • by arodland (127775) on Wednesday September 05 2007, @02:22PM (#20483827)
          Another interesting thing about the Intel driver is that due to being pretty much the most capable open-source driver around, it gets a lot of attention from XOrg way, including being compatible with the latest nifty standards. If I want TV-out on ATI, I have to use a driver that's been in continuous beta for the past four years and reboot the machine with the TV plugged in so the card notices it. If I want TV-out on NVidia I have to put weird crap in my X config file and then run nvidia's custom settings app to configure displays. Okay, better. If I want TV-out on Intel I use xrandr -- from the commandline or from any of the GUI utilities already out there... and it works. Bang. Just like that.
      • by BrainInAJar (584756) on Wednesday September 05 2007, @10:58AM (#20480607)
        What about people like me that use Solaris? or any othe esoteric operating system other than the big-3 ?

        or if there's strange bugs that you think are the drivers fault, and you happen to know enough C to fix them right now instead of whenever the snail-slow vendor gets around to it?

        as for your comment about giving away what you do for a living... AMD doesn't write drivers for money, they make hardware. Intel manages to make hardware and open-source a good majority of their drivers, so that's just a stupid argument.
      • by nuzak (959558) on Wednesday September 05 2007, @12:25PM (#20481959) Journal
        > Is there a particular reason you need the driver to be open-source?

        So it works when the kernel changes their *&^!%@! ABI yet again in the latest patchlevel. To port it to other OS's. So smarter people than me can look at it and find bugs or interoperability problems with it and send vendor updates to it.

        I can understand their reasoning -- video cards are more or less big FPU arrays these days, and the actual 3d graphics is all software, so they might not want to expose their secrets. The other problem is that the competition would use it to find potential patent infringement. It's a Nash equilibrium: the first one to open-source loses. If I were to put the number generously at 50,000 extra customers due to OSS, that simply wouldn't cover the potential loss. But the fact is, there aren't any solid numbers as to what the market effect would be, and uncertainty is in a lot of ways worse than outright losing -- at least you can write off the latter on your balance sheet early.
      • Re:And? (Score:4, Interesting)

        by n0dna (939092) on Wednesday September 05 2007, @10:03AM (#20479719)
        Unless they fired everyone responsible for writing the drivers and the entire QA department, then that still makes this one in a row. Even if AMD holds them to a higher standard, it'll take at least one more good driver to convince anyone of it. Like I said, ATI has had working drivers once or twice before.

        Besides, people have a long memory when it comes to garbage hardware. A $40 game that blows can be a fluke. A $200 (or more) video card that only does 640x480 in 16 colors is harder to forget.

        Once a company burns you on hardware, there's no reason to ever have to go back to them if there is any competition at all. Look at the other options you have for graphics. Hell, people are even using built-in video instead of ATI. How bad do you have to be for people to prefer onboard video?
        • Re:And? (Score:4, Informative)

          by WhiteWolf666 (145211) <moornblade at gmail.com> on Wednesday September 05 2007, @11:01AM (#20480661) Homepage Journal
          I know what the "proof" will be; or at least, the start of a trend.

          Full AIGLX support in 8.42 (the article is discussing 8.41). The claim at Phoronix is that AMD has claimed AIGLX is going in at 8.42.

          Continuing the trend would be MPEG-4/H.264 Xvideo support in 8.4x or 8.5x, preferably within the next 6 months or so (keep in mind that the Radeon 2X00 series have excellent video capabilities).

          If they hit those two goals, I'll most likely purchase 2-3 ATI cards for my Linux boxes; the AIGLX and Xvideo things are a big deal to me, and Nvidia cards don't currently accelerate MPEG-4/H.264.