Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 30 of 30

Thread: The ATI Radeon R600/700 Gallium3D Driver

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    437

    Default

    don't worry, we will get HD 5870 3D acceleration in full speed five years down the road. And to make things even better, you will be able to actually afford to buy an HD 5870 by then! It will cost only a handful of dollars!

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,937

    Default

    Look on the bright side -- if we had Nvidia cards, we would never get open source 3d acceleration

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    315

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by elanthis View Post
    I'd be happy just to have OpenGL 2.1 support on r700 right now. That at least would bring things up to par with what most commercial OpenGL apps require as a minimum version these days.
    Aye agree. That's pretty much DX9 there and to me was heyday of graphics that got blown through to weirdville too quickly as it diverged from showing water nicely with the Transform and Lighting shaders and pushing lots of high quality textures. Then things got strange with with too much attention to texture post processing and just mucking about with justifying so much shader power with no more attention being paid to the hardware pipes. Sorry but it just seems stupid tryng to develope the technology to show high res textures on stupid res 2560x1600 monitors.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,264

    Default

    I have zero problems with high res textures and resolution. I like it.

    But what I hate is the insane shader post processing crap! For those of you who go like "Huh?", take a look at Need For Speed: Shift. Me and a friend of mine call if NFS: Shit. No wait... NFS: Underground. When you accelerate you get such an insane motion blur. There are purple flares everywhere around 'tracks' and hit the gas and the entire screen turns into giant purple poo. It's like: "hey we didn't get gameplay already but let's now destroy the entire vision to mask it". Ulgh...

    Seriously... death to those games. Die in a fire. Those games need to me made ilegal. Gaming got too commercial and as a natural effect all games now need to apeal to john doe no brain who wants to be a super hero by playing semi-interactive b-movie action scenes.

    What do I love about graphics? Everyday believability, like the outdoor 'scenes' of Half-Life 2. Death to the rest...

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    63

    Default

    What does this mean: "r600g: add support for all R6XX/R7XX asic" ? Does it mean my r600 card can worth with Galliium now?

    http://cgit.freedesktop.org/mesa/mesa/log/src/

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,937

    Default

    It probably means that your card will work as well as the other cards are working under r600g right now. In other words, not usable yet.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    80

    Default

    from the mesa/mesa git repo ( http://cgit.freedesktop.org/mesa/mesa/log/ ) I've found:

    r600g: drop compiler stuff and switch over dumb tgsi assembler
    Writing a compiler is time consuming and error prone in
    order to allow r600g to further progress in the meantime
    i wrote a simple tgsi assembler, it does stupid thing but
    i would rather keep the code simple than having people
    trying to optimize code it does.

    Could someone comment onthat and explain what it means, please?

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,574

    Default

    Jerome was working on a new shader compiler for 600g rather than re-using shader compiler code from the "classic" r600 mesa driver. That was something which needed to be done at some point (the shader compiler in 600c is really more of an assembler) but it sounds like Jerome didn't want to hold up getting the rest of the 600g driver going so he put in a simple shader compiler for now. It's what we ended up doing for the initial 600c driver so I certainly understand his rationale.

    If your next question is "why didn't he use the shader compiler from 600c ?" part of the answer is that the input format is different between "classic" and Gallium3d drivers - one uses Mesa IR while the other uses TGSI. For 3xx-5xx the same compiler could be used because the Gallium3d wrapper code converted TGSI back to mesa IR allowing the use of the existing compiler.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    80

    Default

    Thanks for your quick answer

    So, that part "...he put in a simple shader compiler for now." means, he's actually still working on that new shader compiler and that current solution (the TGSI assembler) is like a "quick and dirty" (not being really dirty) solution being less efficient/less featured/less complete?

    Please correct me if I'm wrong.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mcgreg View Post
    Thanks for your quick answer

    So, that part "...he put in a simple shader compiler for now." means, he's actually still working on that new shader compiler and that current solution (the TGSI assembler) is like a "quick and dirty" (not being really dirty) solution being less efficient/less featured/less complete?

    Please correct me if I'm wrong.
    I think the tgsi assembler will just handle straight shader, ie shader without if/else/for/which/loop/jmp/call so it stays simple. Lot of program can be run with such assembler (r600c didn't have support for this for quite sometimes and people were using it).

Posting Permissions

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