Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 57

Thread: A Fresh Look At The AMD Radeon Gallium3D Performance

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    MA, USA
    Posts
    1,102

    Default

    although the gallium drivers are doing amazingly well, why is this project still being continued? isn't amd going to make their video drivers open source anyway?

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    989

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schmidtbag View Post
    although the gallium drivers are doing amazingly well, why is this project still being continued? isn't amd going to make their video drivers open source anyway?
    You mean fglrx, the proprietary drivers? No, absolutely not. They have no plans to do that. I'm 99.999999999% sure. If you think they have plans to open source Catalyst / fglrx, I need an authoritative citation.

    The gallium3d drivers are AMD's open source video driver effort.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    MA, USA
    Posts
    1,102

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by allquixotic View Post
    You mean fglrx, the proprietary drivers? No, absolutely not. They have no plans to do that. I'm 99.999999999% sure. If you think they have plans to open source Catalyst / fglrx, I need an authoritative citation.

    The gallium3d drivers are AMD's open source video driver effort.
    oooo ok that makes more sense now. lol so now i flip around my question - if amd is helping contribute to the open source drivers, why make proprietary ones? its not like they have much to hide.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    989

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schmidtbag View Post
    oooo ok that makes more sense now. lol so now i flip around my question - if amd is helping contribute to the open source drivers, why make proprietary ones? its not like they have much to hide.
    Several reasons:

    *For the proprietary Catalyst drivers, they share 90% of the code between their Windows drivers and the Linux drivers.

    *They compete the most with Nvidia on the performance of the Windows drivers (for gaming and stuff).

    *There are secret algorithms and patented optimization technologies in fglrx (this is publicly unsubstantiated, but I'm pretty confident of the truth of this) that they aren't willing to expose to the general public. They call this their "Intellectual Property".

    *They are willing to disclose most of the hardware details about their cards to enable us to write good open source graphics drivers, but there are still a few things that they won't disclose. Those things get used to their full potential in Catalyst / fglrx. Example: UVD2

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,283

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schmidtbag View Post
    oooo ok that makes more sense now. lol so now i flip around my question - if amd is helping contribute to the open source drivers, why make proprietary ones? its not like they have much to hide.
    I think this is the 26th time I've answered this question

    Proprietary Linux drivers allow code to be shared across OSes, including OSes which require robust DRM and the associated secrecy. Proprietary code-shared drivers allow PC hardware vendors to bring more features and performance to OSes with smaller market shares than they could if all the code had to be developed for (and supported by the sales onto) a single OS.

    If a hardware vendor was writing a driver exclusively for Linux/BSD/Solaris etc.. there's a good chance it would be open source. If the driver shares code with other OSes with hard DRM requirements, then more of the code has to be kept secret and distributing most of the code in binary form ends up as the only practical solution.
    Last edited by bridgman; 06-10-2011 at 07:25 PM.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,283

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by allquixotic View Post
    If you think they have plans to open source Catalyst / fglrx, I need an authoritative citation.
    Me too

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    6,598

    Default

    the oss driver support is very basic when you compare opengl features. xvba nobody really needs without full h264 l5.1 support. if you want to play a game (or at least look at the heaven demo) with tesselation then you are lost without binary driver. it is fun to test oss drivers, with my intel atom netbook with gma 945 even gl2benchmark runs correctly. fbo (test 4) does not work with snb and other oss drivers do not even show the reference pictures correctly. i really would like to see it running with every oss driver.

    http://kanotix.com/files/hellfire/contrib/gl2benchmark/

    runs with debian squeeze, use pbuilder or debuild -b for ubuntu or debian with newer openscenegraph. the build dep is just openscenegraph, should be available everywhere. the version does not matter. if you just do "./configure && make -j4" then you can start it from the dir using:

    OSG_FILE_PATH=data src/gl2benchmark

    Use cursor keys to try all 4 tests - if you want fun enable interactive mode If you want to package it for a non debian system just add a simple startup script like i added in debian/gl2benchmark.sh. really nice for some rendering tests - speed is not that important, but of course you can compare that too. i found a fglrx rendering issue (which was in the opengl code on win too) with that tool, fglrx needed 10 or 11 month to get a fix. btw. it is of course crossplattform, you can build it with any os where you install osg.
    Last edited by Kano; 06-10-2011 at 07:17 PM.

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by allquixotic View Post
    https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37168 is fixed, so now I can use r600g full-time Awesome!
    me to ;-) hon runs well now on the radeon driver. by using oibaf's PPA

  9. #29
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    681

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schmidtbag View Post
    although the gallium drivers are doing amazingly well, why is this project still being continued? isn't amd going to make their video drivers open source anyway?
    Catalyst isn't going anywhere. AMD is however supporting the development of the oss drivers by releasing (most of) the specs for their hardware.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,532

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bridgman View Post
    including OSes which require robust DRM and the associated secrecy.
    *snicker* and yet it is so easily defeated.

Posting Permissions

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