Difference between revisions of "Talk:AMD Catalyst"

From ArchWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Update 'Catalyst#Unofficial_repositories' installation instructions: re)
(state of Catalyst-generator?)
(38 intermediate revisions by 10 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
I love you guys for putting this wiki entry together and maintaining the repositories with the Catalyst driver and the patched mplayer with support for hardware acceleration. It would have taken me many, many hours to make it work as flawlessly as it does.
+
== A kind request ==
 +
People, '''please''' edit a whole section if you change a paragraph! Do '''not''' just edit one line and leave it: re-read the whole paragraph (and chapter header!) so see if everything still corresponds. Example: previous edit to "installing from the official repositories"; the header still said this was the most easiest approach as you need only the '''official repositories''' - after the latest edit this was not the case anymore as we request people to use catalyst-utils from the AUR! Be thorough when editing, please![[User:Unia|Unia]] ([[User talk:Unia|talk]]) 11:25, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
  
[[User:Foutrelis|Foutrelis]] 06:11, 21 June 2010 (EDT)
+
== Notes on major overhaul ==
 +
Hm, I didn't know there was a behind-the-scene page we could discuss this. I had already mentioned some points on the forums I wasn't sure about when I did the major overhaul and update. I will also list them here so other people that don't use the forum can see it (plus my post it already amongst dozens of older ones in the ATI Grill)
  
== XvBA-Video Repository ==
+
* Xorg example file; is it needed? And if it is, most entries are uncommented and I think we should at least provide some information on the options if we decide to keep it.
 +
* Installing from AMD. Should we even instruct this? It's absolutely unrecommended and I for one don't know if the instructions are correct.
  
Note to editors: DO NOT REMOVE that since it works and helps users getting it working!
+
Thanks for working on this article everyone!
  
----
+
[[User:Unia|Unia]] 00:29, 14 October 2012 (Amsterdam)
  
Why keep it around if the information is obsolete now?
+
* xorg.conf: It exists here for reference to those who need it as a starting point.  When I started with Catalyst back in the 8.xx series, there was sporadic (if any) documentation anywhere.  As for explaining the options: there are man pages and X.org also maintains a wiki.  Make links if you have to.
  
[[User:Foutrelis|Foutrelis]] 15:35, 18 August 2010 (EDT)
+
* Installing from AMD: Yes, it needs to be here for those who aren't dependent on *more* layers of scripts that obfuscate everything.  I for one, value the ability of seeing what is happening on a lower level and troubleshooting it myself.  Otherwise I'd still be using Mandriva.  As far as being "unrecommended", that is merely a point of view for the reader to consider.  If X breaks, would you know how to fix it?
  
== Cleanup ==
+
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/The_Arch_Way#Simplicity
  
I think the page needs a good portion of reconstruction. The "Installation" chapter is bloated and cluttered with alot of information one does not necessarily need. Maybe its a good idea to make an new page about the usage details for the script catalyst_build_module. "Troubleshooting" is cluttered and one time even doubled. I am going to make the page more straightforward and vanilla, putting any additional info in new chapters or pages. If no one complains, that is. --[[User:Doc Angelo|Doc Angelo]] 06:06, 22 August 2010 (EDT)
+
[[User:T1nk3r3r|T1nk3r3r]] ([[User talk:T1nk3r3r|talk]]) 23:32, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
----
+
=== Uninstallation ===
I made some cleanup...
+
Successfully merged section from [[ATI]] articleCleaned it up as best I knew howHowever, I do not use the packages suggested here (or fglrx anymore for that matter).  So we just need someone to update/verify the instructions to what the current packages require for a clean removalThen the outdated tag can be removed.   
* Removed about 20% of article (mainly repo section).
+
* Troubleshooting isn't doubled now but still a little bit cluttered (still i think it got very usefull infos).
+
* catalyst_build_module script info is simpler and shorter.
+
--[[User:Vi0L0|Vi0L0]] 16:59, 8 February 2011 (EST)
+
----
+
After referring to this article many times for my own use, I believe the place to start is dividing between 'fglrx from AUR' and 'fglrx straight from binary'.  Maybe going so far as to making a separate page.  And then the bloat can tackled with gusto, with some things reorganized and others clarified/reworded.  I will work on this myself if I find the time...
+
--t1nk3r3r
+
---
+
Since previous efforts have stalled, I will take upon myself to clean up this article.  I have already drawn up an outline with only four main sections while retaining as much info as possible.  Major changes in the next several days... --[[User:t1nk3r3r|t1nk3r3r]] 4 August 2011 (PST)
+
---
+
:I'm not using ATI, so I can't help you with possible mistakes, but I suggest you to split your work in as many edits (i.e. revisions) as possible, so that people can understand more easily your changes ;) -- [[User:Kynikos|Kynikos]] 04:40, 6 August 2011 (EDT)
+
::Sorry, this is my first serious wiki editing sessionBut I will be more mindful in the future, making incremental updates that can be scrutinzed more easily.  I just didn't want a million edits on the history page (although that may be what it needs).  Changes included: Reorganizing the Installation section to differentiate the two methods; Combining/rewording the first paragraph, making it clearer and more neutral in tone; removing several "troubleshooting" entries as redundant with proper installation; removing alot of "ie" and "eg" that really aren't necessary; removing other "word fluff" making instructions more concise; Adding a "features" section for recommended settings in xorg.conf; removing some instructions on using AUR when it has it's own page with how to use it; Moving "Unofficial repos" to the AUR method where they belong; added steps to the second method (based on personal experience/success)As to future edits, I plan to consolidate the AUR method/tool section further (excepting ViOLO's objection)And expanding the Configuration while removing pertinent Troubleshooting entries. Minor edits would be mostly adjustments to wording/language. --[[User:T1nk3r3r|T1nk3r3r]] 12:47, 6 August 2011 (EDT) ---
+
:::Eheh now don't take me literally, with "as many edits as possible" I meant that you should <u>try</u> not to group together different kind of edits like sentence rewording and, say, deprecated content removal. Just always remember to prefer writing in the edit summary the ''reason'' for your changes, more than really a ''summary'', although I see you're already doing it well :) -- [[User:Kynikos|Kynikos]] 05:30, 7 August 2011 (EDT)
+
:::Overall good job! :) I only changed some things that i noticed: moved repositories out from AUR since it's not logicall for me to place it there; + i put catalyst-generator into main manu again cuz i rly like this tool... --[[User:Vi0L0|Vi0L0]] 10:26, 18 September 2011 (EDT)
+
:::So the "Unofficial Repositories" section is basically Catalyst binaries that have been extracted and rebuilt into installable Arch packages? --[[User:T1nk3r3r|T1nk3r3r]] 01:45, 19 September 2011 (EDT)
+
::::Yes, catalyst and other packages, current list of packages is:
+
  
::::---
+
Props to [[User:Unia]] for your dilligence on this subject. [[User:T1nk3r3r|T1nk3r3r]] ([[User talk:T1nk3r3r|talk]]) 17:24, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
  
::::amdoverdrivectrl 1.2.1-1
+
== HD 6870 ==
  
::::catalyst 11.8-1
+
I think the problems with Radeon HD 6870 are outdated, I use that graphics card and I didn't have any problems at all, even OpenCL works fine. -- [[User:Lykos42|Lykos42]] 14:04, 14 March 2012 (EDT)
 +
:Added [[Template:Accuracy]], please next time don't be afraid of adding status templates by yourself :) -- [[User:Kynikos|Kynikos]] 07:59, 15 March 2012 (EDT)
 +
I cannot speak for speak for the HD 6870 but I can confirm that the problem still exists for the E-350 (APU with a HD 6310), and that the posted solution works if the device name is changed (and perhaps without changing it, I didn't test). I have therfore removed the disputed banner and generalized the answer. (As is suspect the fix works for virtually any "unsupported" device). If someone could confirm the naming scheme for the Xorg identifier I would appreciate it. --[[User:Eric Vuhl|Eric Vuhl]] ([[User talk:Eric Vuhl|talk]]) 12:19, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
  
::::catalyst-daemon 11.8-1
+
== Compatibility table ==
  
::::catalyst-generator 11.8-1
+
I've been thinking for a while it might be nice to have a compatibility table or something to see which version of Catalyst works with which versions of X and the Linux kernel. Would this be totally off? Is there a better place to see this information? Would there be a better place to store this information? --[[User:Freso|Freso]] ([[User talk:Freso|talk]]) 11:01, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
  
::::catalyst-hook 11.8-1
+
--
  
::::catalyst-utils 11.8-1
+
I'm not sure for the need of this, why would people want to use an older version? AFAIK there are no major problems with Catalyst 12.9 nor with Catalyst-legacy. For those two, the information is already there:
  
::::lib32-catalyst-utils 11.8-1
+
1. Users with Radeon HD {2,3,4}xxx can only use catalyst-legacy which supports Xorg <= 1.12 (use [xorg112] repo)
 +
2. Users with Radeon HD => 5xxx should use catalyst which supports Xorg 1.13
  
::::xorg-server-catalyst-maximize-fix 1.10.4-1
+
Of course, the more info the better, so if you want to add this feel free to do so! ==[[User:Unia|Unia]]
  
::::xvba-video 0.7.8-4
+
== vaapi with smplayer ==
  
::::---
+
I found smplayer config to use mplayer-vaapi not right.
 +
If you set Video output Driver to vaapi or vaapi:gl, you'll not need to add extra options -vo vaapi to mplayer options
 +
Mplayer won't work if both -lavadopts and -vo vaapi are set.
 +
So we need to turn off -lavadopts option (useful when decode by CPU, but usesless with GPU) by set "Threads for decoding" to 1 in Performance section.
 +
Therefore I decided to edit wiki section about using smplayer. Hope this will be useful for someone!
  
::::True - you will find packages' PKGBUILDs which were used to build those packages on AUR, but "Unofficial repositories" are not AUR: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_User_Repository#Q:_What_is_the_AUR.3F --[[User:Vi0L0|Vi0L0]] 11:47, 19 September 2011 (EDT)
+
== catalyst-dkms ==
:::::+ there are archived catalyst repositories and (also archived) xorg-server repositories with packages that cannot be found on AUR at all --[[User:Vi0L0|Vi0L0]] 11:53, 19 September 2011 (EDT)
+
Is catalyst-dkms working fine without the additional mkinitcpio-dkms package?
::::May I then suggest that said section precede the others under 'Installation' as it would be the easiest/pain-free method? --[[User:T1nk3r3r|T1nk3r3r]] 21:28, 19 September 2011 (EDT)
+
:::::Yes, it would be - i have added info that it's the easiest way, thanks. I also added some more installation informations. + I moved Tools out of AUR's section because those are available also on [catalyst] repo. --[[User:Vi0L0|Vi0L0]] 15:59, 23 September 2011 (EDT)
+
  
== deleted note on nomodeset warning ==
+
By working fine i mean will it compile fglrx module for freshly installed kernel in the background?
  
the nomodeset option si mandatory using catalyst, cause this driver doesn't support kms. The note is useless.
+
Building module while system start is not safe. You system will probably start X before module will be build and so X will fail terribly. AFAIK last related post on the forums in telling that the additional mkinitcpio-dkms package is needed.
[[User:4javier|4javier]] 07:50, 25 April 2011 (EDT)
+
  
== Binary blob modifications ==
+
If it's needed then such information should be added to the wiki.
  
Using Catalyst 11.8 with kernel 3.0 appears to be broken, at least as far as the built-in scripts are concerned.  Anyone have issue with additional instructions in the wiki as I get it working?  Initial experimentation shows the generated module is at least partially usable.  Tweaks to the scripts may make it usable again (until AMD updates the process).  I know this article has been helpful to me since before I even started using Arch, and hope it can ease the headache of others.
+
Even more - if it's needed then i would say that mkinitcpio-dkms package should be added to the community and catalyst-dkms should depend on it, otherwise it's hard to consider catalyst-dkms as "safe".
--[[User:T1nk3r3r|T1nk3r3r]] 02:23, 16 September 2011 (EDT)
+
--[[User:Vi0L0|Vi0L0]] ([[User talk:Vi0L0|talk]]) 10:22, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
:Why broken? By 'built-in scripts' you mean those from originall AMD's installer? I'm asking cuz i don't have any problems, and now i'm using 3.1-rc6 --[[User:Vi0L0|Vi0L0]] 10:32, 18 September 2011 (EDT)
+
::Yes, I use *only* the original installer.  I am referring to the scripts.  And I have it working now. --[[User:T1nk3r3r|T1nk3r3r]] 01:55, 19 September 2011 (EDT)
+
  
== Update '[[Catalyst#Unofficial_repositories]]' installation instructions ==
+
What's more of an issue for now, is if catalyst-dkms will remain available in the repositories now that xorg-server 1.14 became available. Do you have contact with its maintainer?[[User:Unia|Unia]] ([[User talk:Unia|talk]]) 15:07, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
  
It appears to me that these instructions are incoherent.
+
There was a threat on arch-dev-public: [http://archlinux.2023198.n4.nabble.com/Xorg-server-1-14-hitting-testing-td4685077.html].
For example, the heading '[[Catalyst#Xorg-server_repositories]]' (correctly) states that xorg-server 1.10 is the last line supported by catalyst at the moment, while the heading '[[Catalyst#.5Bcatalyst.5D_repository]]' doesn't mention this clearly. The installation instructions also don't reflect the current steps needed to successfully install catalyst.
+
Looks like it will stay.--[[User:Vi0L0|Vi0L0]] ([[User talk:Vi0L0|talk]]) 19:28, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
  
My suggestion is to change the text under the heading '[[Catalyst#.5Bcatalyst.5D_repository]]' as follows:
+
== <s> Kernel development speed </s>==
 +
In the page it says: ''Recently, development and updates of the Linux kernel have speed up, which is causing that incompatibilities between the Linux kernel and the Catalyst package are showing more often.''
 +
: It is not true from my experience, the Kernel graphic stack is calming down after KMS change. True, catalyst is always lacking behind cutting edge. But the incompatible is usually happen between Catalyst and Xorg/XServer, not between Catalyst and Kernel. See the [[AMD Catalyst#Xorg repositories|this section]]. If I am wrong, please give out evidence. Or I have to remove the wrong excuse. -- [[User:Fengchao|Fengchao]] ([[User talk:Fengchao|talk]]) 00:12, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
 +
That message came from Vi0L0 himself, why would he spit out the wrong reasons? Fact is that lately, the forum topic gets spammed alot by (new?) users about a broken Xorg after an update or an update that fails by itself. The reason herein is that Catalyst from Vi0L0's repository is compiled against one kernel and one kernel only. If an update updates the Linux kernel, but no new Catalyst has been supplied yet (just a rebuild from Vi0L0), you get breakage. Please do not remove this "wrong excuse"; it is not wrong at all. Just read the forum topic if you need to see it yourself.[[User:Unia|Unia]] ([[User talk:Unia|talk]]) 16:24, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
 +
:: No. You do not answer my question. I do not care whoever said it. I care about the actual fact. The fact here is: The kernel is moving at a constant speed, and kernel API is as stable as it goes. Vi0L0 only build the package against one kernel version. That is the actual reason here. So I will update the page. -- [[User:Fengchao|Fengchao]] ([[User talk:Fengchao|talk]]) 01:24, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
 +
::: I think there was some mis-communication here. I thought you were planning on removing that warning, but you just rephrased it. That is always good. I do agree that what is there currently is better than what I put up there. Thanks for your effort. -- [[User:Unia|Unia]] ([[User talk:Unia|talk]]) 11:49, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
  
'There is a repository called [catalyst] which contains newest stable catalyst driver and some additional packages<s> like a patched xorg-server</s>. This repository should always work with the stock kernel from [core] and it is updated most frequently. The catalyst driver currently requires xorg-server<1.11.0 though.
+
== What is the state of Catalyst-generator? ==
 
+
Hey Vi0L0, can you tell us what the state of Catalyst-generator is? Does it still work, is it still recommend to use or would we want users to switch over to Catalyst-hook? -- [[User:Unia|Unia]] ([[User talk:Unia|talk]]) 15:24, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
To use it you need:
+
1.) Edit /etc/pacman.conf and add those lines above all other repositories (above [core] and [extra]:
+
 
+
[xorg110]
+
Server = http://catalyst.apocalypsus.net/repo/xorg110/$arch
+
+
[catalyst]
+
Server = http://catalyst.apocalypsus.net/repo/catalyst/$arch
+
 
+
--[[User:Turris|Turris]] 08:29, 5 November 2011 (EDT)
+
:Done, thanks. --[[User:Vi0L0|Vi0L0]] 12:56, 5 November 2011 (EDT)
+
 
+
::No problem. What about
+
[xorg110]
+
Server = http://catalyst.apocalypsus.net/repo/xorg110/$arch
+
+
[catalyst]
+
Server = http://catalyst.apocalypsus.net/repo/catalyst/$arch
+
 
+
::though?
+
 
+
The "unofficial repository" instructions seem to be creeping up to the main Installation header, and it is not clear what applies where.  The whole of the article needs to remain neutral in tone, and allow the reader decide which method to use.  I separated Installation and Configuration as I thought the various methods had common ground when editing *.conf files... [[User:T1nk3r3r|T1nk3r3r]] 04:50, 19 December 2011 (EST)
+
:I've also reworded both the intro to this article and to [[ATI]], to make them look more coherent with each other. -- [[User:Kynikos|Kynikos]] 06:22, 20 December 2011 (EST)
+

Revision as of 15:24, 26 April 2013

A kind request

People, please edit a whole section if you change a paragraph! Do not just edit one line and leave it: re-read the whole paragraph (and chapter header!) so see if everything still corresponds. Example: previous edit to "installing from the official repositories"; the header still said this was the most easiest approach as you need only the official repositories - after the latest edit this was not the case anymore as we request people to use catalyst-utils from the AUR! Be thorough when editing, please!Unia (talk) 11:25, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Notes on major overhaul

Hm, I didn't know there was a behind-the-scene page we could discuss this. I had already mentioned some points on the forums I wasn't sure about when I did the major overhaul and update. I will also list them here so other people that don't use the forum can see it (plus my post it already amongst dozens of older ones in the ATI Grill)

  • Xorg example file; is it needed? And if it is, most entries are uncommented and I think we should at least provide some information on the options if we decide to keep it.
  • Installing from AMD. Should we even instruct this? It's absolutely unrecommended and I for one don't know if the instructions are correct.

Thanks for working on this article everyone!

Unia 00:29, 14 October 2012 (Amsterdam)

  • xorg.conf: It exists here for reference to those who need it as a starting point. When I started with Catalyst back in the 8.xx series, there was sporadic (if any) documentation anywhere. As for explaining the options: there are man pages and X.org also maintains a wiki. Make links if you have to.
  • Installing from AMD: Yes, it needs to be here for those who aren't dependent on *more* layers of scripts that obfuscate everything. I for one, value the ability of seeing what is happening on a lower level and troubleshooting it myself. Otherwise I'd still be using Mandriva. As far as being "unrecommended", that is merely a point of view for the reader to consider. If X breaks, would you know how to fix it?

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/The_Arch_Way#Simplicity

T1nk3r3r (talk) 23:32, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Uninstallation

Successfully merged section from ATI article. Cleaned it up as best I knew how. However, I do not use the packages suggested here (or fglrx anymore for that matter). So we just need someone to update/verify the instructions to what the current packages require for a clean removal. Then the outdated tag can be removed.

Props to User:Unia for your dilligence on this subject. T1nk3r3r (talk) 17:24, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

HD 6870

I think the problems with Radeon HD 6870 are outdated, I use that graphics card and I didn't have any problems at all, even OpenCL works fine. -- Lykos42 14:04, 14 March 2012 (EDT)

Added Template:Accuracy, please next time don't be afraid of adding status templates by yourself :) -- Kynikos 07:59, 15 March 2012 (EDT)

I cannot speak for speak for the HD 6870 but I can confirm that the problem still exists for the E-350 (APU with a HD 6310), and that the posted solution works if the device name is changed (and perhaps without changing it, I didn't test). I have therfore removed the disputed banner and generalized the answer. (As is suspect the fix works for virtually any "unsupported" device). If someone could confirm the naming scheme for the Xorg identifier I would appreciate it. --Eric Vuhl (talk) 12:19, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Compatibility table

I've been thinking for a while it might be nice to have a compatibility table or something to see which version of Catalyst works with which versions of X and the Linux kernel. Would this be totally off? Is there a better place to see this information? Would there be a better place to store this information? --Freso (talk) 11:01, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

--

I'm not sure for the need of this, why would people want to use an older version? AFAIK there are no major problems with Catalyst 12.9 nor with Catalyst-legacy. For those two, the information is already there:

1. Users with Radeon HD {2,3,4}xxx can only use catalyst-legacy which supports Xorg <= 1.12 (use [xorg112] repo) 2. Users with Radeon HD => 5xxx should use catalyst which supports Xorg 1.13

Of course, the more info the better, so if you want to add this feel free to do so! ==Unia

vaapi with smplayer

I found smplayer config to use mplayer-vaapi not right. If you set Video output Driver to vaapi or vaapi:gl, you'll not need to add extra options -vo vaapi to mplayer options Mplayer won't work if both -lavadopts and -vo vaapi are set. So we need to turn off -lavadopts option (useful when decode by CPU, but usesless with GPU) by set "Threads for decoding" to 1 in Performance section. Therefore I decided to edit wiki section about using smplayer. Hope this will be useful for someone!

catalyst-dkms

Is catalyst-dkms working fine without the additional mkinitcpio-dkms package?

By working fine i mean will it compile fglrx module for freshly installed kernel in the background?

Building module while system start is not safe. You system will probably start X before module will be build and so X will fail terribly. AFAIK last related post on the forums in telling that the additional mkinitcpio-dkms package is needed.

If it's needed then such information should be added to the wiki.

Even more - if it's needed then i would say that mkinitcpio-dkms package should be added to the community and catalyst-dkms should depend on it, otherwise it's hard to consider catalyst-dkms as "safe". --Vi0L0 (talk) 10:22, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

What's more of an issue for now, is if catalyst-dkms will remain available in the repositories now that xorg-server 1.14 became available. Do you have contact with its maintainer?Unia (talk) 15:07, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

There was a threat on arch-dev-public: [1]. Looks like it will stay.--Vi0L0 (talk) 19:28, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Kernel development speed

In the page it says: Recently, development and updates of the Linux kernel have speed up, which is causing that incompatibilities between the Linux kernel and the Catalyst package are showing more often.

It is not true from my experience, the Kernel graphic stack is calming down after KMS change. True, catalyst is always lacking behind cutting edge. But the incompatible is usually happen between Catalyst and Xorg/XServer, not between Catalyst and Kernel. See the this section. If I am wrong, please give out evidence. Or I have to remove the wrong excuse. -- Fengchao (talk) 00:12, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

That message came from Vi0L0 himself, why would he spit out the wrong reasons? Fact is that lately, the forum topic gets spammed alot by (new?) users about a broken Xorg after an update or an update that fails by itself. The reason herein is that Catalyst from Vi0L0's repository is compiled against one kernel and one kernel only. If an update updates the Linux kernel, but no new Catalyst has been supplied yet (just a rebuild from Vi0L0), you get breakage. Please do not remove this "wrong excuse"; it is not wrong at all. Just read the forum topic if you need to see it yourself.Unia (talk) 16:24, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

No. You do not answer my question. I do not care whoever said it. I care about the actual fact. The fact here is: The kernel is moving at a constant speed, and kernel API is as stable as it goes. Vi0L0 only build the package against one kernel version. That is the actual reason here. So I will update the page. -- Fengchao (talk) 01:24, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
I think there was some mis-communication here. I thought you were planning on removing that warning, but you just rephrased it. That is always good. I do agree that what is there currently is better than what I put up there. Thanks for your effort. -- Unia (talk) 11:49, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

What is the state of Catalyst-generator?

Hey Vi0L0, can you tell us what the state of Catalyst-generator is? Does it still work, is it still recommend to use or would we want users to switch over to Catalyst-hook? -- Unia (talk) 15:24, 26 April 2013 (UTC)