OSNews

RV630: Radeon HD 2400 series
M56: Radeon X1600 series.

The M56 also seems to be called RV530, or at least based on it. I don't really understand the relationship.

M stands for mobile while RV530 is the desktop version. I'm not really sure how many differences there are between the mobile and non-mobile chips as far as creating drivers go.

Well, gfx drivers coders will certainly find this to be a goldmine. 500+ pages of detailed specs is certainly enough to write excellent OpenGL support.

Even if AMD can't release any driver software whatsoever due to 3rd party licensing, this information is certainly enough to enable enthusiasts to do the heavy lifting if they so desire.

First off, this is only the 2D specs. 3d is coming later. And the OSS driver is due in a week or so according to /.

It's even less than that - I had a quick scan through and all this stuff will let you do about 3 things. 1 - run VGA mode, 2 - setup your own video modes and memory timings, 3 - run video overlay surfaces and hardware mouse cursors.

I couldn't find any HW acceleration of blit,fill etc stuff in there at all.

Mind you, it's a start.

What difference does it make make if most people know what to do with them. The point is to allow those that _do know_ to write drivers.

AMD is not releasing code, only specs. But they're working with novell to creeate good drivers, AFAIK.


I don't see how you can't be "convinced" - the specs are out there, and they're certainly much better than nothing.

Edited 2007-09-12 21:40

"The final judgement will certainly be the code that AMD releases and what the community can do with it."

Actually, it's not up to ATI anymore to provide code, though they will still provide binary drivers. It's up to OSS coders to take those specs and really shine

"Actually, it's not up to ATI anymore to provide code, though they will still provide binary drivers. It's up to OSS coders to take those specs and really shine"

I hate the word actually. AMD do not have to do anything!? the fact that they are making good on their promises many including myself is a positive step.

I personally would like *greater co-operation* on a unified open-source driver. The "you open-source programmers work on your driver...we will work on our binary one", is not really positive...

...its just more positive than those who write the open source drivers working without specifications.

So would I but for the moment, this is a good first step.

Who knows? If the OSS community starts a good Linux driver project, they may get ATI engineers helping out with any questions and maybe even code.

I have the feeling that the current proprietary driver codebase is ment to be replaced by a strong opensource community release in the future. Once most of the work is done, all that remains is tweaking to get a high performance and stable 3d driver. I would think that ATI would very much want to be involved with that.

It doesn't require "most" people to know what to do with the specs. It just needs a small group, and that's what we as an Open Source community already have.

You where not paying attention... they will not release driver code, they are enabling other people to develop drivers.

I've been trying to figure this out and am ashamed to say that all these driver numbers are confusing me.

I dont blame you

I wish they could just use one model number, and just apply a "L" behind the laptop version.

I'm guessing they're too embarrased about radeon xpress 200 to actually release specs for it.

Same as my 9600, apparently no specs for those. Supposedly they are fairly well supported by the open source driver.

Also the binary drivers coming up are supposed to work much better on R300 chips as well.

"Same as my 9600, apparently no specs for those. Supposedly they are fairly well supported by the open source driver.

Also the binary drivers coming up are supposed to work much better on R300 chips as well."

Allegedly these will follow.

They are well supported, but suspend doesn't work. At all. I'm not happy about it.

Yes, but it was a CD containing 12MB.

Via did well with the release of the Unichrome driver, but have blown it since with their lack of support for further development. Most of the new Via Unichrome chipsets are not fully supported because of a lack of details from Via & S3.

S3 are even worse in this regard with no open Deltachrome or Gammachrome drivers at all. It's very poor, especially as the previous generation (Savage) was so well supported.

Yeah, they already said it earlier that they'll provide 2D specs first, 3D specs a bit later. But then again, you don't need those 3D specs yet anyway since you don't have a working 2D driver either yet. First 2D, then 3D.

does it have AIGLX and Randr 1.2 support?

AIGLX is supposed to come with next months drivers. I doubt it has the new Randr support either, but I don't know for sure.

If you're a seller, you want sell your goods. If your goods are not supported by a growing market os exotic operating system, then you'll gonna loose market share. So what're gonna do if you do not plan to focus development teams on these OS ? Then just open the specs, let the coders do, and sell your goods. And sell it even more as the competition have close-sourced politic (Via/S3) either because they don't focus on this market (earn enough with embedding the video chip on a mini-itx MB) or because you're too lazy to figure out. However the consumers will make the choice ! And with the upcoming Compiz integrated by default to major Linux distro, you'd better be ready to have drivers supporting the new desktop, otherwise prepare to be the laughing stock of competitors !