Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 36

Thread: ATI Gallium3D + Wine Is Bettered A Bit

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    242

    Default

    The more advanced Gallium3d is the more likely that Intel will switch their drivers over to it. That would provide a nice increase in economies of scale.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,264

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by brent View Post
    Actually I think stabilizing the current level of support (OpenGL 2.1) and improving performance is more important than full support for OpenGL 4.0 on paper.
    I disagree. Performance is improving anyway. Linux/BSD/Haiku need to be on the forfront of technology in order to stand above of Mac OS X and Windows in way or the other. Literaly last time I checked, Snow Leopart still had OpenGL 2.1. Imagine your favo OS is graphicaly more advanced than the Mac...

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    772

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by brent View Post
    Actually I think stabilizing the current level of support (OpenGL 2.1) and improving performance is more important than full support for OpenGL 4.0 on paper.
    I don't see how that's even an actual choice. Gallium3D moves us toward a lot more than "OpenGL 4.0 on paper". Stability should improve with better factoring of GPU driver vs. memory management vs. API code. Performance should improve as these components are optimized. We probably could have had better performance today if everyone was still hacking at classic Mesa drivers, but then we'd probably have been stuck there for another 5 years, watching GPUs and games/apps advance while we sit around comparing Doom 3 framerates.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    PL
    Posts
    912

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by curaga View Post
    IMO it's Wine's fault; since when is it good behavior of an app to depend on a particular compiler optimization?
    you should compare amount and type of bugs reported with wine+nvidia blob to bugs reported on wine+mesa. and compare wine compatibility when running different graphics hardware.

    it's not a surprise that wine works better with nvidia driver or catalyst. the driver issue is very important here.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    119

    Default

    I've got R500 and Fedora 14 installed (Gallium 0.4, Mesa 7.9). When I type glxinfo in terminal, there isn't any GL_ARB_depth_clamp listed.

    Here http://www.mesa3d.org/relnotes-7.9.html It is mentioned that

    GL_ARB_depth_clamp and GL_NV_depth_clamp extensions (in nv50 and r600 Gallium drivers)

    So there is nothing about r300.

    Does anybody have GL_ARB_depth_clamp available on his R500 hardware?

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    625

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NSLW View Post
    I've got R500 and Fedora 14 installed (Gallium 0.4, Mesa 7.9). When I type glxinfo in terminal, there isn't any GL_ARB_depth_clamp listed.

    Here http://www.mesa3d.org/relnotes-7.9.html It is mentioned that

    GL_ARB_depth_clamp and GL_NV_depth_clamp extensions (in nv50 and r600 Gallium drivers)

    So there is nothing about r300.

    Does anybody have GL_ARB_depth_clamp available on his R500 hardware?
    We had to disable it because it caused issues.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    119

    Default

    Thanks for reliable answer. I hope you developers will enable it again soon.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    my bíggest problem for wine+radeon is the texture compression support oblivion starts and runs but the enemys do not have a skin ,

    and arma2 does not start because of checking texture compression feature.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    119

    Default

    If you talk about S3TC then there is small piece of code to compile which adds support for texture compression.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NSLW View Post
    If you talk about S3TC then there is small piece of code to compile which adds support for texture compression.
    mmh i think its s3tc but arma2 for exampel shows the error "dxt1...dxt5 support missing"

    but yes i think s3tc is the openGL name.

    is there a howto to activate the s3tc support ???

    yes with the catalyst s3tc works... radeon needs some extra love there..

    i hope in the future they will find a way arround this patend stuff and then vanilla OS drivers will work

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
  •