We were told it was almost impossible to write good drivers with no specifications. Then, 3 years ago, AMD released the specs. Thank you, AMD.
Three years passed. More specs were released. Developers worked very hard on them. Thank you all, developers.
But the open driver still does not break the 30fps wall.
"with Gallium everything will boost to the stars!" we are told. Maybe. But Gallium has been around for a while, and... (i'm keeping my ears shut...)
:eek: No sonic boom?
Look, I don't blame developers, really. They did everything they could. But the lack of good gaming and video streaming on linux has been a serious issue to its spreading in the world as a desktop system which could fully replace MS-Windows. And ten years of improving step-by-step-almost-there-but-not-yet, :( didn't get us to the goal.
I wonder if it still has a point to continue developing drivers which will never catch up the (older) proprietary (but what's wrong? what's still missing, beside perhaps time and money?), or would be better to forget all the "free as in freedom" ideal for a while and set a fundraiser to pay AMD programmers for improved linux support to all chipsets from R100-R800 to the future?
It already caught up in some things - 2D is better, video is without tearing, suspend/resume is working, OS driver is probably more stable. 3D is much worse right now, but it should get some boost soon.Quote:
I wonder if it still has a point to continue developing drivers which will never catch up the (older) proprietary (but what's wrong?
Option "ColorTiling" "True"
Only 3D performance should be affected by this. I can't assure you it has been tested by the Ubuntu QA team (i.e. that it works).
What you had 2 years ago was basic drivers on a relatively old architecture which was limiting both performance and functionality (eg GL support was capped at 1.x). What you have today is equally basic drivers running on a significantly improved architecture. The drivers aren't much faster than they were 2 years ago (heck, they're slower in some cases), and you could argue that the code is even less mature in some ways, but the work that *has* been done over the last couple of years was a pre-requisite to the kind of functionality and performance that users want to see.
From an end-user perspective it looks like "gee, after 2-1/2 years they're finally at GL 2 and even that is still buggy", but what really happened was more like 2 years of rearchitecture work that didn't give you *any* visible benefits plus a big spurt of progress in the last 6 months built on the previous 2 years of behind-the-scenes work.
I'm still on an X1600 Pro (RV530), so I know all about the performace thereof... I switched to the open-source driver around the same time AMD introduced the amdpcsdb.
Which reminds me... I may be getting an HD 5570 ("R8xx"). Is the amdpcsdb still in use?
Sorry, I left out one point. A lot of the re-architecture work was hardware-independent but needed to be done separately in each of the existing drivers (essentially taking existing code and re-implementing it in a different form), and the availability of programming docs wouldn't help much there.
Yes, AFAIK the amdpcsdb file is still being used by fglrx.