Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 28

Thread: Gallium3D's Softpipe Driver Now Runs Faster

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,388

    Default Gallium3D's Softpipe Driver Now Runs Faster

    Phoronix: Gallium3D's Softpipe Driver Now Runs Faster

    Keith Whitwell has gone ahead today and merged the softpipe-opt branch of Mesa into the master Mesa branch, which will eventually work its way into Mesa 7.7. The softpipe-opt branch brings performance optimizations to the "softpipe" driver of Gallium3D...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=NzU1Mg

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    301

    Default

    SMP support? that would be nice.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    21

    Default

    When is gallium going to replace the old mesa/3d drivers?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    1,749

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by patstew View Post
    When is gallium going to replace the old mesa/3d drivers?
    In a distant future populated by robots arguing with each other which API is the best for accelerating holografic video output?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    144

    Default

    So we can get software accelerated compositing if you don't have a hardware to run it?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    983

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crispy View Post
    So we can get software accelerated compositing if you don't have a hardware to run it?
    You have never tried software rendering in Mesa, have you?

    Joking aside, having a finely tuned software rendering option in Gallium would be very nice. Microsoft has shown that it doesn't have to be that slow: http://techreport.com/discussions.x/15968

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    1,749

    Default

    Neat although actually beating a discrete card would have been *far* more impressive.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    102

    Default SW rendering

    Amiga demo scene veterans (like me) are amazed Compiz ever needed HW support. That kind of effects was cool back in 1989 on 7-10 MHz machines (albeit lower res then now). Thats why I am always so mad about graphic subsystem and its memory usage. In my mind, X should need this amount of memory: 1680*1050 (resolution I have), * 4 (RGBA) * 2 (double buffering) * 2 (lets have some comfort, memory is cheap) < 30 MB !!! My X is using right now 100 MB of virtual memory (Ubuntu) with Compiz _disabled_. I know, I know, it is storing bitmaps for applications. but it means X is storing such amount of bitmaps it could cover my desktop completely 10 times or more! How can that make any sense to anyone? Thats so wasteful. That, and Get Of My Lawn!

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    1,749

    Default

    Hehe, you're probably right. With good enough low-level coders it could use a lot less system resources than it does. (not that nearly anyone does that low-level coding anyway anymore)

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    195

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nanonyme View Post
    Hehe, you're probably right. With good enough low-level coders it could use a lot less system resources than it does. (not that nearly anyone does that low-level coding anyway anymore)
    Yes, that's the biggest problem. Everyone thinks that optimized java/python is good. Blecch....

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •