and how does that fit with the phoronix stories?
A lot of information comes from phoronix - but very few actual links to sources of information. Sometimes it's an opinion of phoronix, not actual current information. So until I read a direct quote from unigine, I will take any phoronix story with a grain of salt (just like semiaccurate articles).
Unfortunately, the only choice available to Linux user is Nvidia if this user wants fully functional GPU.
You want ALL features working ? buy Nvidia
You want video acceleration today ? buy Nvidia
You want stable 3D performance for gaming ? buy Nvidia
I don't like this situation as I own ATI card. Just looking to replace it. Under Linux this HD4850 is still useless as desktop card.
It's not important what I can do as far as there much more then one thing that I can't.
And don't say open ... The open source drivers are even less useful.
I like the idea, and wish them luck, but as far as hardware acceleration for video will not be there, they are useless on AVERAGE DESKTOP.
I hope that somehow Google's VP8 release as open source will allow AMD to release HW acceleration documentation for this format.
I'd actually say that it's about 60% or so of the time it's the developer that oopsed something in their code- like you said, many don't apply a strict interpretation of the meanings in the spec docs. It's a source of recurring gotchas within many titles. They didn't get a shader coded right and missed a key value which NVidia supplies, but AMD doesn't. They didn't pay attention to the "may" in the spec doc and presumed it was a possibility- but it wasn't going to happen to them. That sort of thing.
Originally Posted by mirv
Tags for this Thread