omni Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 (edited) After some peeking and poking around, I have a pretty grim conclusion to present. When it comes to graphics support for your card in OS X86, if you do not own ATI R520 chip, forget about full support. That ATINDRV.kext seems to have been written with a specific goal of ONLY supporting the R520 chip, as evident from numerous functions relating to the R520 chip as well as PCIExpress references. Apple knew they would use R520 in their new systems and when it comes to cutting cost it only makes sense not to spend programming time on something you will not need, in this case support for all the other ATI chips and cards. Why not? Because they will not be used in the future systems, those chips are old and almost obsolete now. What puzzles me is why are the appropriate ATI kexts still updated and compiled for x86 if they are not going to be used. My guess would be that the code tree contains the sources and they are simply included in the process of compilation as a relic from PPC side which still utilizes most of them. But this means nothing to us when we do not have basic ATI frame buffer support, and we will never see it come from Apple. The only way we can get our old cards to full power (and this includes NVIDIA who will have the same fate once Mac Pro's or PowerMac Pro's or PowerMac Core duo come out) is to write our own frame buffer device driver (no it is not THAT hard but it will take a few people to write/port existing ones). I hope someone can prove me wrong about the above, I'll gladly admit I was wrong... The alternative is to simply buy a new iMac Core Duo, PowerBook Pro or PowerMac Pro (when available) and enjoy a beautifuly designed computer, which actually works good, and runs a well done operating system. This implies saving a bit more money first, instead of impulsively buying some run-of-the-mill PC and trying to run OS X on it, hoping everything will work as intended. Edited January 17, 2006 by omni Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enb14 Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 After some peeking and poking around, I have a pretty grim conclusion to present. When it comes to graphics support for your card in OS X86, if you do not own ATI R520 chip, forget about full support. That ATINDRV.kext seems to have been written with a specific goal of ONLY supporting the R520 chip, as evident from numerous functions relating to the R520 chip as well as PCIExpress references. Apple knew they would use R520 in their new systems and when it comes to cutting cost it only makes sense not to spend programming time on something you will not need, in this case support for all the other ATI chips and cards. Why not? Because they will not be used in the future systems, those chips are old and almost obsolete now. What puzzles me is why are the appropriate ATI kexts still updated and compiled for x86 if they are not going to be used. My guess would be that the code tree contains the sources and they are simply included in the process of compilation as a relic from PPC side which still utilizes most of them. But this means nothing to us when we do not have basic ATI frame buffer support, and we will never see it come from Apple. The only way we can get our old cards to full power (and this includes NVIDIA who will have the same fate once Mac Pro's or PowerMac Pro's or PowerMac Core duo come out) is to write our own frame buffer device driver (no it is not THAT hard but it will take a few people to write/port existing ones). I hope someone can prove me wrong about the above, I'll gladly admit I was wrong... The alternative is to simply buy a new iMac Core Duo, PowerBook Pro or PowerMac Pro (when available) and enjoy a beautifuly designed computer, which actually works good, and runs a well done operating system. This implies saving a bit more money first, instead of impulsively buying some run-of-the-mill PC and trying to run OS X on it, hoping everything will work as intended. By now maybe that's the only solution but remember that mac have to support this hardware for long time, Ati X1600 cards in three years will be {censored} but apple has to continue supporting it so we are having this such of problems because macs are new but in 6 months will be easier to load OSX on our custom moded PCs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bofors Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 (edited) When it comes to graphics support for your card in OS X86, if you do not own ATI R520 chip, forget about full support. Assuming this is true, what are we looking at for x1600 cards? $200 ballpark? When do we expect them to hit the market? Next month? EDIT: These are availible now for $100 - $150 http://www.pricegrabber.com/search.php?for...=g_us_b_s&skd=1 Edited January 17, 2006 by bofors Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andypandy Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 I wonder what would happen with an Intel D945GTP main board (costs about $150 but supports EFI according to Intel specs) and an X1600 (another $150)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enb14 Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 I wonder what would happen with an Intel D945GTP main board (costs about $150 but supports EFI according to Intel specs) and an X1600 (another $150)? yeap I would like to know that too, I'm tempted to buy an D945 motherboard but I wanna be sure if it will make osx to work Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyrana Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Well, good luck... But as you know EFI support does not equal EFI installed inplace of BIOS. Also, according to ATi, the x1600 cards in the iMac have a custom firmware, they aren't stock PC firmware (someone could maybe dump the iMac one I guess, somehow). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bofors Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 (edited) yeap I would like to know that too, I'm tempted to buy an D945 motherboard but I wanna be sure if it will make osx to work I ordered an Intel D945GNTLKR already, but do to popular demand for BIOS versons I have no expectation for EFI OSx86 anytime soon. Well, good luck... But as you know EFI support does not equal EFI installed inplace of BIOS. Also, according to ATi, the x1600 cards in the iMac have a custom firmware, they aren't stock PC firmware (someone could maybe dump the iMac one I guess, somehow). Yes, but that is another EFI/BIOS issue not a Mac/PC issue (the stock PC firmware is BIOS not EFI), so it should not be neccessary to get the ATI EFI firmware off a Mac as we should expect the PC EFI cards to have the same firmware. But we should not expect EFI x1600 cards until the release of Vista or x86 PowerMacs anyways, BIOS versions of the x1600 are not even out yet. EDIT: Wrong, BIOS x1600 cards are availible now for $100 - $150: http://www.pricegrabber.com/search.php?for...=g_us_b_s&skd=1 However, I think that people will get BIOS x1600 cards running on some BIOS 10.4.3/4+ hybrids in the meantime. I also suppose that the x1800 cards availible now will be compatible with x1600 drivers. Edited January 17, 2006 by bofors Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gdfath3r Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 So...little success.....I could load ATIRadeon9700.kext ( 10.4.4 version) with my x800xt pcie, but no CI an QE...so if could somebody tell me how could I enable them?...... Type: VGA-Compatible Controller Bus: PCI VRAM (Total): 256 MB Vendor: ATI (0x1002) Device ID: 0x5d57 Revision ID: 0x0000 Displays: Display: Resolution: 1280 x 1024 Depth: 32-bit Color Core Image: Not Supported Main Display: Yes Mirror: Off Online: Yes Quartz Extreme: Not Supported I only edited the kext and added my devID, repair permissions etc....etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bofors Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 (edited) Is it reasonable to seperate BIOS/EFI differences from driver issues? I mean, although BIOS and EFI cards need to be initialized differently, once they are initialized are they effectlively the same? Does the driver send them the same commands without regard to weather they are on a BIOS systems or an EFI system? Should we expect BIOS cards to work with a driver system designed for EFI once they are initialized? It seems like this EFI Compatibility Support Module (CSM) might also operate at the card level too. Should we expect future cards to support EFI but also be backwards compatible with BIOS? This sort of thiing is already going with the Intel EFI/BIOS motherboards. I wonder if the new EFI Core Duo Macs would run BIOS 10.4.3? Hmm... Edited January 17, 2006 by bofors Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twinkikabuki Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 I believe both CI and QE come with the ati9700ga bundle or other... and if anything like my experience, you'll get a black screen with pointer. In reply to Gdfath3r of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bofors Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 (edited) More EFI related thoughts... Is Apple working with the Intel Platform Innovation Framework for EFI? http://www.intel.com/technology/framework/overview1.htm We should know and if so perhaps we should analyze the problem in terms of it's two major phases: Pre-EFI Initialization (PEI) and Driver Execution Environment (DXE): http://www.intel.com/technology/framework/overview3.htm EFI has been in developement for years, here is Intel's list of resources including "Driver Writer's Guides": http://developer.intel.com/technology/efi/efi.htm Edited January 17, 2006 by bofors Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gdfath3r Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 I believe both CI and QE come with the ati9700ga bundle or other... and if anything like my experience, you'll get a black screen with pointer. In reply to Gdfath3r of course. Yepp, I got the black screen, what it means?... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bofors Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 ... we should expect the PC EFI cards to have the same firmware [as Mac EFI cards]. This is increasingly becoming clear, as EFI is supposed to be hardware independent as well: One major issue with today's BIOS is the way add-in cards are handled, or in some cases, mishandled. The BIOS has access to only a limited amount of memory to load Option ROMs. Sometimes, if two or more high-end cards are used in a system, the system cannot boot because there may not be enough memory to load drivers. With the Framework, code is no longer forced to run under the 1-MB line in memory. This means there is room to load all of the Option ROM drivers needed for any number of high-end cards. With today's BIOS, card architecture must also match the system architecture. This means developers must design two cards for every product release -- one card for 32-bit systems, and another for Itanium-based systems. With the Framework, that doubling of work is unnecessary. Instead, one add-in card can be used for all Framework-based systems. The obvious benefit is the reduction in development costs and the halving of manufacturing resources. The ultimate benefit is that a single card can be bought in greater volume, thus reducing system costs overall. http://www.deviceforge.com/articles/AT4903582708.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gdfath3r Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 You ppl better open a topic related to EFI..im interested in Radeon drivers as the topic title says...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bofors Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 (edited) You ppl better open a topic related to EFI..im interested in Radeon drivers as the topic title says...... Yes, you are probably right, but I am here because I am also interested in the ATI drivers and understanding this EFI stuff seems to be the real the problem with making the new ones with 10.4.4 work now. In any case, I am totally burned out on the OSx86 nonsense. So here is my last find: Intel’s EFI Replacement Roadmap ftp://download.intel.com/technology/frame...map_EFIS001.pdf There are some interesting tidbits in there. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ EDIT: I am getting the idea we need a general EFI/BIOS thread because I really do not think anyone here has a very good understanding of what is now perhaps the critical technology. It used to be Rosetta was the key to making things work, now wether it be booting Windows on the new EFI x86 Macs or using ATI drivers on generic hardware, the lack of understanding EFI/BIOS issues is the now the common problem. Does anyone else think this forum need a general EFI/BIOS thread so we can discuss how this transition to EFI is supposed to work in some technical detail? Edited January 17, 2006 by bofors Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romey-rome Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 According to the roadmap, all boards should be EFI by the end of the year...? Pg31 Also, according to the roadmap, all enterprise boards are to be EFI by the end of '05. (that's last year BTW) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bofors Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 (edited) When it comes to graphics support for your card in OS X86, if you do not own ATI R520 chip, forget about full support. That ATINDRV.kext seems to have been written with a specific goal of ONLY supporting the R520 chip... I'm sure this is a minor point, but I belive the ATI x1600 is a RV530: http://arstechnica.com/reviews/hardware/imac-coreduo.ars http://www.beyond3d.com/misc/chipcomp/?vie...er=Order&cname= ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Here are two EFI PowerPoint presentations in PDF format, albeit a little dated, that ATI had a hand in: Replacing VGA: Theory, Practice and Demo of EFI and UGA - ATI Technologies Inc. (ATI), Microsoft Corporation, Intel Corporation: ftp://download.intel.com/technology/efi/docs/EFI95uga.zip EFI & UGA: Pre-boot & Runtime Environment - ATI Technologies Inc. (ATI), Microsoft Corporation, Intel Corporation: ftp://download.intel.com/technology/efi/docs/efi49uga.zip Again, these and much more on EFI can be found here on Intel EFI resource page: http://www.intel.com/technology/efi/efi.htm ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ A MUST READ? This looks like a kick ass overview of not only BIOS and EFI but also Openfirmware with example code and respect to partitioning and video issues: http://www.kernelthread.com/publications/firmware/ Edited January 17, 2006 by bofors Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
munky Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 @bofors: "BIOS versions of the x1600 are not even out yet." eh... am i missing something? the following page would seem to have a number of X1300, X1600 and X1800 cards, all 'in stock'. are you saying these won't work on BIOS machines? surely not? http://www.ebuyer.com/customer/products/in...subcat_uid=1576 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bofors Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 (edited) Here appears to be yet another good EFI resource from Intel: EFI How To Guide Draft for Review Version 1.0 March 15, 2004 This help system provides information on how to perform numerous activities within EFI. The topic areas that are discussed include the following: * Disk Utilities * Boot Manager * Configuration Driver Boot * Console Redirection * EFI Shell and File System * EFI Drivers * Identification * USB * Network Interface For more information on the EFI Shell commands that are referenced in this help system, see the EFI 1.1 Shell Commands Specification, which is available in the EFI Sample Implementation from the EFI web site. ftp://download.intel.com/technology/efi/d...xt/EfiHowTo.txt @bofors: "BIOS versions of the x1600 are not even out yet." eh... am i missing something? the following page would seem to have a number of X1300, X1600 and X1800 cards, all 'in stock'. are you saying these won't work on BIOS machines? surely not? http://www.ebuyer.com/customer/products/in...subcat_uid=1576 Hey, thanks for pointing this out. Looks like x1600 cards are already availble in the UK at under $150. I was saying that I did not find any of these for sale in USA (but I now it looks like I was just not trying hard enough, I should click on the "pricegrabber" link instead of being lazy with Google). Of course these will "work" in a BIOS machine, the question is if (and how) can we make them work with the EFI driver system for OSx86 10.4.4. Now, I can find these x1300/x1600 cards in the USA too: Sapphire RADEON x1300 - ~$100.00 http://www.pricegrabber.com/p__Sapphire_Ra...ati+x1300/skd=1 ATI Radeon X1300 Video Card ~$150.00 http://www.pricegrabber.com/p__ATI_Radeon_...ati+x1300/skd=1 I think I am going to order one of these ATI Radeon X1300 video cards myself. I am building my first x86 box right now and I ordered two 20" Dell panels (2005FPW's) that UPS delivered five minutes ago. The rest of my parts should show up this week. Edited January 17, 2006 by bofors Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omni Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 (edited) Thing is, as someone noted above, the x1600 firmware included in iMac is different than the ROM BIOS on those PCI-E cards in stores. More so that the firmware is probably a EFI CSM (since the chip is on-board and not a separate graphics card). I'm sort of skeptic of seeing a PCI-E x1X00 card working with the new drivers, but until someone tries we wont know for sure Edited January 17, 2006 by omni Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bofors Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 (edited) OK, I am probably going to order the ATI Radeon X1300 Video Card unless someone here has a better suggestion. Then at least one of us here will have what should be the closest thing to the iMac card (and I am getting an Intel D945 board so should be basically as close as we can get to the real thing). However, before I do I have one question. Will I at least be able to run dual displays (1280 x 1024) in an extended desktop mode using VESA (if all else fails)? Edited January 17, 2006 by bofors Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
munky Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 so... i guess no-one around here has one? it seems insane that the X1300 is more expensive than the X1600, as i beleive the X1300 is less powerful than the 1600...? you might want to double check that before you buy one. also, the X1300 and X1600 have had STINKING reviews in the trade press. too pricey and not powerful enough, apparently. the X1800 seems to be quite good tho (but even pricier). big ups to all. - munky - still wishing his goddamn 6800 was supported Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pixelshaders Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 please add mirrors also. kinkadius: [Violation of DMCA] [Violation of DMCA] if any more mirros, please post them. thanks! [Violation of DMCA] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bofors Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 More so that the firmware is probably a EFI CSM (since the chip is on-board and not a separate graphics card). I do not understand why you think the Mac x1600 has an EFI CSM? That would be for BIOS compatibility which is clearly not applicable here. The other question I have about such an idea, is it even possible for a graphics card to have it's own CSM? Or are CSM"s only permitted at the motherboard level? I'm sort of skeptic of seeing a PCI-E x1X00 card working with the new drivers, but until someone tries we wont know for sure My understand of this business is pretty low and I have yet to even mess with OSx86 on generic hardware yet (but my parts have been shipped). I have a lot of technical questions though about EFI and BIOS that are probably going to take a long time and experimentation with a card to answer though. Seeing, as I have no video card yet (but the GMA 950 onboard and two displays to drive), I am willing to take the minimal risk. Does anyone think that I should order something other that the ATI Radeon X1300 Video Card ~$150.00 http://www.pricegrabber.com/p__ATI_Radeon_...ati+x1300/skd=1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johan Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Yepp, I got the black screen, what it means?... when i use the updated 915gl kext from 10.4.4 , i got the same thing. osx boots , and i just see a blach screen with a mousepointer so its not just with the ati drivers, but also the intel 915gl drivers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts