Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 35

Thread: Unigine Heaven Update Coming With OpenGL Tessellation

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,718

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jrch2k8 View Post
    no, since fglrx it never founded a way to properly accel 2d since ever, they are trying to use opencl/stream (aka gpgpu acceleration) to make 2d faster like they are doing in the windows drivers, they are just maintaining the same name as windows driver aka direct2d (ovbiously is not exactly the same as the direct2d dx11 api, they are just taking the same concept but for xorg api).

    i agree that the catalyst for windows is quite decent, but we are talking about fglrx here and linux

    and where did you get this information?

    besides. that new 2d system is still very beta - so no surprise it is slow.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,385

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jrch2k8 View Post
    yeah, well remember catalyst receive 99% of the love from amd, fglrx on the other side is heavily bugged to begin with, and 1 thing have fglrx proved in all this years, if it works at least decently on windows already on fglrx will take a hell of releases to even get close. so if direct2d follow the same path that 2d accel, xvba, stream/opencl, wine, etc have follow, well the first releases woud be havoc if you activate "direct2d" until several releases later

    well ok unigine demos for now are only eyecandy i give you that, but remember some games from that engine are coming for linux too, so eventually would be peachy to have full support for that engine.

    well wine working fine with fglrx is not going to happen any time soon, even the foss drivers are more compliant now than fglrx(ok slower, but the stuff render as it should or at least load the apps without sigsegv's, r700 still miss gl 2.1 support for now)

    well remember opengl4 is not a different library or something else, opengl unlike directx doesnt need to have different library or api every version. aka

    opengl4 use a lot if not most of opengl 3.3 and opengl2.1 and opengl 2.0 and ok you get the point.

    so opengl4 is only a subset of additional functions that call a certain number of registries supported only in a specific set of hardware, in fact you can run tessalation on a non evergreen hardware for example having an opencl fallback (ok wouldnt be that cool as the supported hardware but it can improve the image quality in previous generation if you wanna bother in doing it). so even if you claim wine doesnt support opengl4(wich is only a limited set of function inside the gl library btw) , wine support gl3.3, so ok you miss the goodies of evergreen and some new shaders functions in glsl, but you are using most the gl implementation in fglrx wich is proved again and again to be buggy not only in wine.

    so even if you had wine+gl4 support today probably all your games would be equally bugged as they are today

    dunno i would just prefered that fglrx team forget for a time gl4 and focus on debug the most of their current libgl implementation, so they can later focus on get a superb gl4 now with a working 3d system, but well
    This seems like a good time to remind that the OpenGL/OpenCL stack in the Linux Catalyst driver (aka fglrx) is the *same* as the one in the Windows Catalyst driver. The OS-specific glue is different, of course, but the core code (>95%) is common - that's the main reason binary drivers exist in the first place. If you want totally different development priorities for Linux and Windows then you really should be looking at the open source drivers - binary drivers from all vendors use common code across multiple OSes so the development priorities are essentially locked together as well.

    What you call "Direct2D" acceleration (it's not Direct2D by the way) has never been announced or discussed; you only know about it at all because someone violated their NDA and leaked info about code which was still in development. Complaining about the performance of something that is still under development seems misplaced at best.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    621

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bridgman View Post
    This seems like a good time to remind that the OpenGL/OpenCL stack in the Linux Catalyst driver (aka fglrx) is the *same* as the one in the Windows Catalyst driver.
    No one say that OpenGL is better under Windowns And under Windows the most Apps use D3D.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,385

    Default

    I believe jrch2k8 was - the post I was responding to seemed to imply a big difference in quality between a feature in fglrx and the same feature (OpenGL 4 in this case) on Windows :

    Quote Originally Posted by jrch2k8 View Post
    yeah, well remember catalyst receive 99% of the love from amd, fglrx on the other side is heavily bugged to begin with, and 1 thing have fglrx proved in all this years, if it works at least decently on windows already on fglrx will take a hell of releases to even get close.
    Are you saying the post was really about DX11 vs OpenGL rather than the Windows and fglrx implementations of OpenGL ?

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,718

    Default

    well, has someone tried unigine on windows with opengl on ati?
    If yes, and it works, we know that unigine is bullshitting around.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Merida
    Posts
    1,099

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by energyman View Post
    well, has someone tried unigine on windows with opengl on ati?
    If yes, and it works, we know that unigine is bullshitting around.

    It worked fine last time I tried, which was with Catalyst 10.3 I believe.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jrch2k8 View Post
    yeah, well remember catalyst receive 99% of the love from amd, fglrx on the other side is heavily bugged to begin with, and 1 thing have fglrx proved in all this years, if it works at least decently on windows already on fglrx will take a hell of releases to even get close. so if direct2d follow the same path that 2d accel, xvba, stream/opencl, wine, etc have follow, well the first releases woud be havoc if you activate "direct2d" until several releases later

    well ok unigine demos for now are only eyecandy i give you that, but remember some games from that engine are coming for linux too, so eventually would be peachy to have full support for that engine.

    well wine working fine with fglrx is not going to happen any time soon, even the foss drivers are more compliant now than fglrx(ok slower, but the stuff render as it should or at least load the apps without sigsegv's, r700 still miss gl 2.1 support for now)

    well remember opengl4 is not a different library or something else, opengl unlike directx doesnt need to have different library or api every version. aka

    opengl4 use a lot if not most of opengl 3.3 and opengl2.1 and opengl 2.0 and ok you get the point.

    so opengl4 is only a subset of additional functions that call a certain number of registries supported only in a specific set of hardware, in fact you can run tessalation on a non evergreen hardware for example having an opencl fallback (ok wouldnt be that cool as the supported hardware but it can improve the image quality in previous generation if you wanna bother in doing it). so even if you claim wine doesnt support opengl4(wich is only a limited set of function inside the gl library btw) , wine support gl3.3, so ok you miss the goodies of evergreen and some new shaders functions in glsl, but you are using most the gl implementation in fglrx wich is proved again and again to be buggy not only in wine.

    so even if you had wine+gl4 support today probably all your games would be equally bugged as they are today

    dunno i would just prefered that fglrx team forget for a time gl4 and focus on debug the most of their current libgl implementation, so they can later focus on get a superb gl4 now with a working 3d system, but well
    I have to ask you this. Do you own an ATI card? Or are you just a nvidia fand bashing ATI?

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,718

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Melcar View Post
    It worked fine last time I tried, which was with Catalyst 10.3 I believe.
    well, then we have it:

    unigine is talking bullshit. Who is surprised?

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    912

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by energyman View Post
    well, then we have it:

    unigine is talking bullshit. Who is surprised?
    Not unigine - I've never actually seen any official word from them. Well I'll correct that; someone did ask (I'll have to dig back a while to find a link) and unigine replied that it was not amd's drivers holding things up.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    912

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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