Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 32 of 32

Thread: May 2011: Gallium3D vs. Classic Mesa vs. Catalyst

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    240

    Default

    just another stupid question/idea of mine:

    how complicated/useful/performant/whatever would it be to have some layer for computation: What i mean is something that hides all computational cores and then distinguishes which/how many cores to use for a certain program call.

    So every graphics would be run in software renderer using opencl on the gpu for instance (or on multiple GPUs) dividing work according to the cores (high performant GPUs for 3D works and integrated ones for 2D and say CPU for C-Ray calculations)

    or is the idea just stupid as programs themselves have to decide where they want to be run on and into how many threads they can divide?

    hasnt there been some article recently on CUDA for kernel uses?

  2. #32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AnonymousCoward View Post
    Does anyone play Quake Live with the radeon driver? It's about the only game I play that is a "must work". I don't own an ATI card so I can't test it myself.
    I just tried nouveau with my nvidia card. All of the graphical features I use work with Quake Live, and FPS stays around 125fps. However, there are pauses for half a second here and there. Doesn't happen with the binary drivers. Also, games run under wine are far too slow, even old games like Half-life 1.

    Pretty impressive nonetheless, but not quite there yet. KMS is nice, though.

Posting Permissions

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