Reply With QuoteSounds like nonsense to me. My old X1950XT (R580) had full 2.1 support with Catalyst (it had shader model 3 too in terms of DirectX).
My even older Radeon 9800 (R350) supports shader model 2 (or even 2.1, not sure) and GL 2.0.
Interesting change to Xorg Radeon feature matrix
I see that things have changed at http://www.x.org/wiki/RadeonFeature:
R300, R400 and R500 (as well as RS690) hardware is now declared to be only capable of OpenGL 1.5, whereas R500 at least used to be thought capable of OpenGL 2.0 or 2.1.
I certainly couldn't consider the R500's OpenGL support to be green while so many 3D games are still listed as "garbage":
http://www.x.org/wiki/RadeonProgram
Sounds like nonsense to me. My old X1950XT (R580) had full 2.1 support with Catalyst (it had shader model 3 too in terms of DirectX).
My even older Radeon 9800 (R350) supports shader model 2 (or even 2.1, not sure) and GL 2.0.
Last edited by RealNC; 11-01-2009 at 01:04 PM.
Yup. "Radeon" now gives my puny 200M OpenGL1.5 to work with. ToEE is now playable with WINE.
I think you're confusing hardware acceleration with software acceleration. The drivers have been able to play with OpenGL2 for a while, but in software acceleration mode. Hell, even the PTS "system compliance" test reported the radeon drivers as OpenGL2.1 capable. However, as far as hardware acceleration goes the drivers were stuck at 1.3 for a long time. And many open source games are playable with open drivers (as long as you don't use features that need OpenGL2.0 and higher features).Originally Posted by chrisr
Last edited by Melcar; 11-01-2009 at 01:19 PM.
The Wiki claims the hardware is not capable, which is wrong.
No it's not. This was talked about in a thread around here somewhere but I'm not going to dig it out.
The point was that there are some features which OpenGL 2.0 requires which are definitely not possible to do in hardware on anything up to r500. But they're apparently not very much used and afaik easy to do in software, which is probably what fglrx does (or it just lies about supporting >=OGl 2.0, cause it supports the interesting things anyway).
Edit: Well, contradictory to what I just said I went ahead and dug the posts out:
http://www.phoronix.com/forums/showp...1&postcount=22
http://www.phoronix.com/forums/showp...7&postcount=27
By the way as far as I can see the Feature Matrix still says 2.0 (or maybe it's again?).
Last edited by Zhick; 11-01-2009 at 02:58 PM.
If those cards were good enough for modern OpenGL games with Catalyst, I'd say they should be good enough with the open drivers too. "Professional" GL apps are of course another matter. I'm purely talking from a gamer's perspective here (since those cards are/were mainly gaming cards.)
Looks like agd5f updated the matrix a few hours... um... in the future ??
So anything <=R500 is not 100% OpenGL 2 compliant hardware?
Wait what?
I had to read that over a few times cause I wasn't sure I was understand it right. I guess nobody would have really known without free drivers. I guess that's another reason for open source stuff.
This page says hardware newer than R400 (i.e. R500) does, "NPOT's of any kind perfectly." Is it incorrect/lying or am I misunderstanding? http://www.opengl.org/wiki/NPOT_Textures
The ARB NPOT extension requires that NPOT textures also support mipmaps and other operations that were previously only supported on POT textures. The older rectangular texture extensions did not require this functionality.
Posting Permissions
