Talk:AMD Software

Repeating info with Radeon article
Isn't this a repeat of the information posted in that article? I don't see a such need for a hardware driver to be mentioned in a seperate page. --202.40.157.165 05:55, 12 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Well, the article could be renamed to ATI Catalyst Control Center. It is notable since the software unified all of ATI's Radeon drivers. It also did come before NVIDIA nTune. I'll try to rewrite this into a software article. I did, just needs a better tag and a better writer. Can someone at least redirect this to ATI Catalyst Control Center or Catalyst Control Center and any variation of it. Loompyloompy313 14:54, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Damnit, if it reads like a advertisement, which it shouldn't. Forgive me. Loompyloompy313 15:48, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Latest Version

 * There's a new version (Catalyst 8.4) out as of a few days ago. --99.128.98.117 (talk) 05:24, 28 April 2008 (UTC)


 * 8.11 is current as of Nov. 12 2008 - Sure would be nice if some knowledgeable person could say something about how this package works under Linux.


 * see Crimson 16.5.1 beta in http://www.pcgameshardware.de/AMD-Radeon-Grafikkarte-255597/Downloads/Radeon-Treiber-Download-1156225/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.67.31.234 (talk) 19:28, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

latest hotfix: 16.5.2 http://support.amd.com/en-us/kb-articles/Pages/AMD-Radeon-Software-Crimson-Edition-16.5.2.aspx, should these be used as the preview version? 15.11 is deprecated.Galciv12 (talk) 21:33, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Actual 16.5.3 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.67.31.234 (talk) 10:08, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Supported hardware | Video Acceleration
The sentence refers twice the same. Should it be: Unified Video Decoder (UVD) and video encoding Video Codec Engine (VCE)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Janvlug (talk • contribs) 17:46, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

crossfirex
I added crossfire as a feature managed by the catalyst, but I don't know if I described it very well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Playwrite (talk • contribs) 11:18, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Requested move
Requesting move over redirect because Catalyst is not just a driver, it is a software suite that includes a driver and a program used in conjunction with it (the Catalyst Control Center). IMO it would be best to discuss them in one place. As for the proposed title's validity, you can see on the home page that the phrase "ATI Catalyst" (without "driver" appended) is used in promotional images. This is also the WP:COMMONNAME, some 2.2m ghits vs 140k for the current title. Ham Pastrami (talk) 06:23, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Initial Version
4.1 is definitely not the initial version. The earliest one that I know of are 2.x. http://www.oldapps.com/old_version_ati.php has the earliest at 0.2.5, which is dated April 10, 2001. Anyone know of earlier versions? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.116.184.49 (talk) 11:47, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Clarify the relation between Catalyst and fglrx
The section on fglrx seems to imply that Catalyst is incorporated into fglrx. If that is correct, it should be explicitly stated. A rather elementary question a Linux user faces is whether to go to an AMD site and download proprietary drivers or whether to expect these drivers to be already present in fglrx. ( My guess would be that this question would not have a simple answer.) The relation between Catalyst and fglrx should be described, at least in general terms.

Tashiro (talk) 14:48, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Gnu/Linux issues
Lack of citation on the x.org/flgrx incompatiblilty point. Is this still true? 150.203.212.66 (talk) 02:56, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Current preview version
Hi, the current preview version is 14.41 RC1, the beta OpenCL 2.0 Catalyst (currently only for Windows 8.1 and Linux systems, not all supported GPU families included officially - yet) http://support.amd.com/en-us/kb-articles/Pages/OpenCL2-Driver.aspx 149.172.132.174 (talk) 12:14, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

DDX and Glamor
Hi, the initial release of amdgpu DRM-driver mentions ddx: xf86-video-amdgpu here: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2015-April/081501.html. Yet the http://xorg.freedesktop.org/wiki/RadeonFeature/ claims they use glamor. User:ScotXW t@lk 09:55, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Radeon Software Crimson
"Along with renaming their driver stack from Catalyst to simply Radeon Software, the Crimson branding will be sticking with this release cycle."

- AMD's Radeon Software Crimson Driver Released: New Features & A New Look


 * Source: http://www.anandtech.com/show/9811/amd-crimson-driver-overview

The article could be renamed to Radeon Software Crimson. --Ykhwong (talk) 15:14, 26 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Moving the article is probably bad:


 * 1) Radeon Software is software re-written using Qt (software), while the old Catalyst was using .NET. => new article
 * 2) As anandtech correctly wrote, "Crimson" is just some additional name, that will likely will be replaced. => name new article "Radeon Software" User:ScotXW t@lk 13:01, 24 January 2016 (UTC)


 * The article's name has to be 'Radeon Software'. The 'Crimson' name is incomplete: It's 'Radeon Software Crimson Edition' for about one year (November 2015 to November 2016, supposedly), as stated by Radeon Technologies Group. (I cannot find a source for that now, sorry.) So, soon there will be a new tone of red attached to the static name 'Radeon Software', followed by 'Edition'.
 * I suspect no one wants to rename the article every 365 days. --178.19.232.238 (talk) 09:56, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Actual version 16.5.3 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.67.31.234 (talk) 10:07, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 13 December 2018

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: moved as requested per the discussion below. Dekimasu よ! 06:47, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

AMD Radeon Software Crimson → AMD Radeon Software – Crimson was merely a version of Radeon Software. It has since been replaced by Relive, and then Adrenalin; the most recent update's full name is AMD Radeon Software Adrenalin 2019 Edition, with driver version 18.12.2, as seen on AMD.com. The "Drivers" page shows "Radeon Software" as the subheader, with "Adrenalin 2019 Edition 18.12.2" listed as the revision number. The individual revisions of Radeon Software do not merit separate articles, and the article lede currently calls it AMD Radeon Software, without including Crimson. Sakkura (talk) 19:27, 13 December 2018 (UTC) --Relisting. Flooded  with them hundreds  08:04, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Support this move 72.239.6.168 (talk) 20:26, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment: Sure, I think my vintage 2011 VAIO with a Mobility Radeon falls under some pre-Crimson pre-AMD ATI 64bits OEM- cruft . (@72.239.6.168: as IPs we're not supposed to vote, and there's anyway no voting, the closing user can evaluate all offered opinions without counting :-p) –84.46.53.106 (talk) 22:19, 28 December 2018 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Update needed jan 22
The article is vastly outdated and would benefit from a complete overhaul.

The introduction focuses on the UI...

Heavy references to ATI, some to Mantle, Firestream in GPGPU, old perspective on current ROCm... Maxorazon (talk) 10:57, 23 January 2022 (UTC)


 * I started the cleanup. Changed the current references to Radeon Software, removed a mass of obsolete and irrelevant info, updated infobox, added bulleted list of current features.
 * Still needs major work. Kronix1986 (talk) 15:59, 15 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Thank you ! Although it is a little sad, IMO, to clear the whole linux 'history', without leaving some gist.Maxorazon (talk) 18:06, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Major version history (naming/edition)?
Inside article there are mentions such as "from Crimson" or "Catalyst version X", but tehnically is still the same software/utility (just different major version).

Shouldn't there be only 'version X' (without adrenalin, crimson, catalyst)? For simplicity?

I also did some research on name change (by looking over older drivers) and this is what i found so far:

Not sure if this is of any use at all (for history section).Basically a history of major version (edition) name changes or "era": Adrenalin (2017-today), Crimson (2015-2017), Catalyst (unknown-2015)

I used table example only because it was easier to summarize. Rando717 (talk) 13:01, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Stable & Preview versions in infobox
Wouldn't it be better to write the latest "Recommended" channel drivers for the Stable version in the infobox, and the latest "Optional" channel for Preview (regardless if it's WHQL or not), instead of the current form of latest WHQL (regardless Recommended or Optional) for stable and latest non-WHQL Optional for preview?

If you've paid close attention to last several months of AMD Software releases, you'll have noticed that when a new Optional driver is released, initially it's going to be non-WHQL. However, about a week or two later, that same Optional driver is re-released as WHQL, with no other changes whatsoever at all. That driver release in question could still have quite a number of glaring issues in it, the WHQL logo is not a guarantee that the driver is free of major bugs.

AMD Software 22.11.1 for example, used to be non-WHQL Optional, now it's available as WHQL Optional.

AMD uses "Recommended" and "Optional" release channels to demarcate last highly stable driver releases from any newer ones that don't have guaranteed high stability.

Here's an article worth reading on the subject: https://www.techradar.com/news/amd-throws-shade-at-nvidia-over-quality-of-graphics-drivers

Scroll down to where it says: "Here’s where it gets really interesting, as Wong goes on to explain that AMD has ‘recommended’ and ‘optional’ drivers,"

Basically Recommended drivers are guaranteed to be more stable than Optional WHQL drivers by AMD. The abundance of anecdotal evidence on the internet (e.g. on online forums) suggest so as well.

@Rando717 What do you think?

— AP 499D25 (talk) 00:45, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

If you want we can use latest recommended for stable and latest optional as preview.
 * At first I wasn't sure how to group updates (or to use optional non-whql as stable), so I decided to use WHQL drivers for stable (even if optional/not "recommended") and latest optional for preview.
 * But sometimes there are actual "preview" drivers, for example [May 2022 preview driver].
 * I have radeon card so I am aware of recommended/optional and that optional drivers sometimes change into WHQL, also re-releases with no changelog (just new release date).
 * Could be more practical using recommended, to me it sounds good whatever option you choose. Rando717 (talk) 11:19, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes I'm aware there's also been some 'preview' driver releases in the past. Also worth of note is that there's been some "beta"-named releases as well, usually specific ones, such as 20.5.1 beta with HAGS and 16.2.1 beta for non-GCN.
 * Another idea I thought of is to have both recommended and optional in the "stable release" section, placing a line break or two inbetween. However, it seems quite funny to put non-WHQL optional driver under "stable" category, plus it's indeed more practical using the stable = recommended, preview = optional (WHQL or non-WHQL) approach.
 * I think that approach is the way to go, compared to something that looks like this:
 * AP 499D25 (talk) 02:32, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
 * True, there are actual beta drivers, like 20.5.1 beta driver.That was 2 years ago, preview one released this year (more "recent").
 * This looks good, but I don't think we should add preview May 2022 drivers (it was like 6+ months ago?).
 * If I am not mistaken DX11 optimizations are applied inside current drivers, also all compatible products (from May 2022) are still supported with current drivers.
 * Is WHQL info even necessary? Rando717 (talk) 08:59, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm aware of how the naming system works (year, month, n release within that month).
 * That infobox I wrote above is just a worst-case scenario example of what I'd consider a 'messy' way of writing versions, compared to the simplistic way of Recommended for stable, Optional for preview.
 * I have also been informed that optional non-WHQL drivers aren't considered "beta" drivers, as they still go through WHQL tests before making it to release, they just haven't received the certification from Microsoft, which is a separate thing. A recent addition to the release notes of AMD software (starting with 22.10.2) is a little "WHQL Results" table at the bottom of the page, showing if the driver has passed the test suite or not, and where the certification is at.
 * Indeed, upon a closer read of that Techradar article, it also states that non-WHQL-signed still go through "strenuous validation, including WHQL-readiness", confirming what has been said above.
 * Indeed the DX11 optimisations have been implemented in official release drivers, particularly in version 22.5.2. Once again the infobox above in previous reply (which is not being correctly rendered) was written as an example of what I'd consider a messy layout of versions.
 * So, with all these things above in mind, here's my next idea:
 * I wrote the May 2022 Preview above as just an example/placeholder. When there's a preview/beta version that contains changes/additions not released in an official driver, it would be added to the preview section. Once those features are added to official release, that preview version would be deleted from infobox.
 * On the actual article I may also add footnote explaining what recommended and optional releases are (for those unfamiliar with what they mean)
 * AP 499D25 (talk) 10:26, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
 * On the actual article I may also add footnote explaining what recommended and optional releases are (for those unfamiliar with what they mean)
 * AP 499D25 (talk) 10:26, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:52, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
 * AMD Radeon Software 22.1.2 on Windows 11.png

Requested move 18 April 2024

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (non-admin closure) Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 01:57, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

AMD Radeon Software → AMD Software – Officially rebranded to 'AMD Software' since mid 2022, sources:,. However I am not sure if "AMD Software" is a recognisable and precise title, hence starting a discussion on this. — AP 499D25  (talk)  08:54, 18 April 2024 (UTC) — Relisting.  microbiology Marcus [petri dish·growths] 16:17, 25 April 2024 (UTC) The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Support per nom.--Ortizesp (talk) 12:50, 29 April 2024 (UTC)