4 ms·

Open source is great, but AMD is not a good example of how to do open source right. AMD's drivers are often not usable in released kernels until many months aft

Open source is great, but AMD is not a good example of how to do open source right. AMD's drivers are often not usable in released kernels until many months after hardware is released. For example, AMD is just now adding initial support for their new GPUs [1]. From what I have read, good support for AMD's previous generation is only now getting to distributions. Intel on the other hand typically has their drivers in released kernels long before their hardware is released. Intel's New GPUs haven't been released yet, but they first started adding support in early 2019 [2]. I can't find it now, but I remember hearing a story about Intel removing drivers from the kernel tree for some hardware that they cancelled. If you want to use a modern high-end GPU in Linux, your only real choice continues to be Nvidia. Their drivers are not open source, but at least they work at launch (except maybe with a 5.9 kernel?). This is why Intel entering into the high-end GPU space is so exciting. Soon we may have a high-end option with good open source drivers while the part is still high-end. [1] https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Linux-5.9-Released https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Linux-5.... [2] https://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2019/02/18/intel-already-adding-linux-kernel-support-for-2020-dedicated-gpu-releases/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2019/02/18/intel...

sce 6y ago
This comment is very weird. For Linux users it is definitely better buying an AMD discrete graphics card than Nvidia, and it has been for an eternity. Just google "torvalds Nvidia" as an example of how the community feels about Nvidia. Is it even possible using Nvidia cards with Wayland? Nvidia has a history of problems in Linux. I can still remember having to log out of my X session just to change monitor layout; which is something you do alot with a laptop and external displays. Took them several years to fix! I've experienced intel boards where I had trouble getting anything but the newest fedora with custom kernel parameter to even get the installer running. But most of the time intel has very good upstream support, so it is normally a pretty safe bet. With AMD there are sometimes delays getting full support for a new generation upstreamed (e.g. hdmi audio and such), so it is usually good to Google for Linux reviews first. In general AMD has superb open source support for their cards, if not immediately at launch, and I recommend them for Linux users who want the least amount of hassle. I've seen people recommending Nvidia to Linux on YouTube (and now here), and I honestly think it's a disfavor to anyone interested in Linux.
bgorman 6y ago
Your comment is highly inaccurate- and in fact is basically straight up Nvidia propoganda. The article you linked to is an article about AMD submitting code for unreleased hardware, which is exactly what you said they are not doing. I have been using a Polaris based card for years (card released in 2017), and the drivers were submitted in 2016. The kernel drivers were ready at launch and key features like HDMI audio were all working out of the box. Now, you might need to install a modern kernel for everything to work- but that is the Linux way. It is true that the initial performance was not super great- maybe about 70% of the possible performance, however this was addressed by subsequent improvements to mesa (userspace portion) AMD has even gone out of their way to support older, obsolete graphics cards that were released before AMD adopted the open source first strategy. Source: https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=AMDGPU-Polaris-12 https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=AMDGPU-P...
- loosescrews 6y ago
  The difference is the timeline. Basic support landing ~1 month before launch is not acceptable. We barely have a stable kernel with this initial support, and that kernel won't have been picked up by any distributions. Further, for previous AMD hardware releases, this initial support has not been really usable from what I have read. Most of the posts I found on Reddit pointed to it taking several months after launch for the Navi drivers to stabilize. Even then, running a custom kernel in my experience is a lot more trouble than the proprietary Nvidia drivers. Compare to Intel where you have initial basic support landing around 2 years before launch with incremental improvements following. This is the correct way to do open source drivers.

sce 6y ago

This comment is very weird. For Linux users it is definitely better buying an AMD discrete graphics card than Nvidia, and it has been for an eternity. Just google "torvalds Nvidia" as an example of how the community feels about Nvidia. Is it even possible using Nvidia cards with Wayland? Nvidia has a history of problems in Linux. I can still remember having to log out of my X session just to change monitor layout; which is something you do alot with a laptop and external displays. Took them several years to fix! I've experienced intel boards where I had trouble getting anything but the newest fedora with custom kernel parameter to even get the installer running. But most of the time intel has very good upstream support, so it is normally a pretty safe bet. With AMD there are sometimes delays getting full support for a new generation upstreamed (e.g. hdmi audio and such), so it is usually good to Google for Linux reviews first. In general AMD has superb open source support for their cards, if not immediately at launch, and I recommend them for Linux users who want the least amount of hassle. I've seen people recommending Nvidia to Linux on YouTube (and now here), and I honestly think it's a disfavor to anyone interested in Linux.

bgorman 6y ago

Your comment is highly inaccurate- and in fact is basically straight up Nvidia propoganda. The article you linked to is an article about AMD submitting code for unreleased hardware, which is exactly what you said they are not doing. I have been using a Polaris based card for years (card released in 2017), and the drivers were submitted in 2016. The kernel drivers were ready at launch and key features like HDMI audio were all working out of the box. Now, you might need to install a modern kernel for everything to work- but that is the Linux way. It is true that the initial performance was not super great- maybe about 70% of the possible performance, however this was addressed by subsequent improvements to mesa (userspace portion) AMD has even gone out of their way to support older, obsolete graphics cards that were released before AMD adopted the open source first strategy. Source: https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=AMDGPU-Polaris-12 https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=AMDGPU-P...

loosescrews 6y ago
The difference is the timeline. Basic support landing ~1 month before launch is not acceptable. We barely have a stable kernel with this initial support, and that kernel won't have been picked up by any distributions. Further, for previous AMD hardware releases, this initial support has not been really usable from what I have read. Most of the posts I found on Reddit pointed to it taking several months after launch for the Navi drivers to stabilize. Even then, running a custom kernel in my experience is a lot more trouble than the proprietary Nvidia drivers. Compare to Intel where you have initial basic support landing around 2 years before launch with incremental improvements following. This is the correct way to do open source drivers.