So ... what about ATI/AMD these days?

[tox]

There is a bug with Nvidia Geforce GTX 460 v2 which caused Anaconda to run blank, workaround as to use VESA. I am currently use rpmfusion binary of nvidia.

For AMD, I am using Zacate powered laptop with Radeon driven. I haven't tested fglrx driver yet.
Speaking of Enlightenment, has somebody managed to bring it back to Fedora repository?

my Videocard is a 550ti i tried OpenSuse 12.2 M3 both normal video an Vesa, both didnt work

[Dan]

Speaking of Enlightenment, has somebody managed to bring it back to Fedora repository?

No. Although, I wish they would. I've been fetching it from here.

http://repo.fedora.md/fmd/fedora/

In fact, I've been kicking around the idea of packaging it myself. But the learning curve will be both deep and steep.


EDIT: Taken just moments ago ... (See attachment.)

[Fenrin]

IMHO if you don't play much advanced games and also don't play games via wine, the default Radeon driver is probably better than the proprietary AMD/ATI driver for AMD/ATI cards.
Especially if it's not a newer card than Radeon 6xxx series and on a desktop computer were power saving is not essential.

[Yellowman]

Ati support is worst than piss poor.

http://forums.fedoraforum.org/showthread.php?t=279687

[Dan]

Yeesh!

I'm kinda having a hard time figuring out what's motivating these people!

[BBQdave]

IMHO if you don't play much advanced games and also don't play games via wine, the default Radeon driver is probably better than the proprietary AMD/ATI driver for AMD/ATI cards.
Especially if it's not a newer card than Radeon 6xxx series and on a desktop computer were power saving is not essential.

Not a full (research) comparison by any means; but at the local Buy More, they let me test their display notebooks with a live F16 (Xfce) cd. Intel video tested well, most nvidia was OK, but no succes with AMD/ATI.
Of their display notebooks, the best functioning and responsive notebook was a Toshiba Satellite C655 (with intel graphics).

I ended up with the Toshiba, and so far so good with F16

[Fenrin]

In my own experience I can say that Radeon HD 3200 and Radeon HD 4650 is pretty decent with the default driver (not Catalyst), if high 3D acceleration is not important. With Catalyst much better 3D performance, but not as easy to maintain and get working (if I choose a compatible distro like CentOS 6 or so, I don't have issues with this).

But with cards of radeon HD 6xxx series and newer, I have no idea how well the Open Source driver support is with the default Radeon driver.

[ElderSnake]

I find it kinda ironic that NVIDIA, who are extremely closed and proprietery in their developement approach which means our open source guys have to reverse engineer their drivers, seem to have the best all round drivers and performance.

[Fenrin]

I find it kinda ironic that NVIDIA, who are extremely closed and proprietery in their developement approach which means our open source guys have to reverse engineer their drivers, seem to have the best all round drivers and performance.

On the OS which about 95% of users use, there is not a considerable quality difference between AMD's and Nvidia closed source drivers IMHO.
Also Nvidia doesn't support Optimus yet on Linux (while AMD's technology called PowerXPress is supported for some Radeon cards). And until recently Nvidia didn't support xrandr, which has been supported by ATI/AMD for at least 2 years.

But I agree that AMD's closed source linux driver is not the best driver under Linux. Nvidia is probably the better choice for the people who don't care about Open Source and for people who want to play windoze games via wine.

[Deminox]

Trying to get Catalyst to work on F17 (or hell even F16) is a nightmare. My TV is my monitor, its an older Sanyo HD. I guess overscan is part of the problem, but my model does not have an option to disable overscan, it just has 4 default "pix shape" settings (none of them fix the problem with Fedora widescreen resolution flying off the edge of my tv). I had a similar problem in win7, but the catalyst options easily fixed that. So I download the latest AMD/ATI drivers. I run the package. I choose "build package" and of course Fedora isnt listed. So I do the listpkg command to see what is supported. THIS is what I got

************************************************** ***********************************************
List of generatable packages:

Package Maintainer(s): Aric Cyr <aric.cyr@gmail.com>
Mario Limonciello <superm1@gmail.com>
Status: *UNVERIFIED*
Debian Packages:
Debian/sid
Debian/unstable
Debian/etch
Debian/stable
Debian/lenny
Debian/testing
Debian/experimental

Package Maintainer(s): Niko Mirthes <nmirthes@gmail.com>
Michael Larabel <michael@phoronix.com>
Status: *UNVERIFIED*
Fedora Packages:
Fedora/FC3
Fedora/FC4
Fedora/FC5
Fedora/FC6
Fedora/F7
Fedora/F8
Fedora/F9
Fedora/F10
Fedora/RHEL3
Fedora/RHEL4

Package Maintainer(s): Anssi Hannula <anssi@mageia.org>
Status: *UNVERIFIED*
Mageia Packages:
Mageia/1
Mageia/2

Package Maintainer(s): Dmitry Mikhirev <dmikhirev@mandriva.org>
Status: *UNVERIFIED*
Mandriva Packages:
Mandriva/2007.0
Mandriva/2007.1
Mandriva/2008.0
Mandriva/2008.1
Mandriva/2009.0
Mandriva/2009.1
Mandriva/2010.0
Mandriva/2010.1
Mandriva/2010.2
Mandriva/2011.0
Mandriva/2012.0

Package Maintainer(s): AMD
Status: Verified
RedHat Packages:
RedHat/RHEL5_64a
RedHat/RHEL6_64a
RedHat/RHEL5
RedHat/RHEL6

Package Maintainer(s): Emanuele Tomasi <tomasi@cli.di.unipi.it>
Status: *UNVERIFIED*
Slackware Packages:
Slackware/Slackware

Package Maintainer(s): Sebastian Siebert <freespacer@gmx.de>
Status: *UNVERIFIED*
SuSE Packages:
SuSE/SLE10-IA32
SuSE/SLE10-AMD64
SuSE/SLE11-IA32
SuSE/SLE11-AMD64
SuSE/SUSE113-IA32
SuSE/SUSE113-AMD64
SuSE/SUSE114-IA32
SuSE/SUSE114-AMD64
SuSE/SUSE121-IA32
SuSE/SUSE121-AMD64
SuSE/SUSE-autodetection

Package Maintainer(s): Alberto Milone <alberto.milone@canonical.com>
Status: *UNVERIFIED*
Ubuntu Packages:
Ubuntu/gutsy
Ubuntu/hardy
Ubuntu/intrepid
Ubuntu/jaunty
Ubuntu/karmic
Ubuntu/lucid
Ubuntu/maverick
Ubuntu/natty
Ubuntu/oneiric
Ubuntu/precise
Ubuntu/source

For example, to build a Debian Etch package, run the following:
% ./amd-driver-installer-<version>-<architecture>.run --buildpkg Debian/etch

Removing temporary directory: fglrx-install.MvJ5gw
************************************************** ************************************************** ************

So yeah, we have minimal support. I could alway install Suse, but i found it to be slow and clunky. humbug. I prefer fedora.

Anyone know if any of these "untested" packages will work?

[Fenrin]

[...]

you won't have any luck in Fedora 17 with Catalyst versions <=12.4. Because these Catalyst version don't support xorg-server version 1.12.x

If you want to install it under Fedora 16 or older, just choose the option install instead of "build package". And before that install gcc, kernel-headers, kernel-devel (or kernel-devel-PAE if you use a PAE kernel!), etc. Then check the install log below /usr/share/ati and use the command "aticonfig --initial".

another way would be to try leighs guide for Fedora 15. Leigh's guide isn't updated anymore, but it should work on Fedora 16 too. Personally I've had better experience with kmod-catalyst than akmod-catalyst. But usually I just use the default Radeon driver or I use the installer from ati.amd.com

(this is actually off-topic if you need more help, it's better to create a new thread about your issue or use the forum search.)