Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 19 of 19

Thread: AMD Radeon HD 7000 Series Gallium3D Merged

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,383

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by curaga View Post
    Geforces just got harder to program with Kepler, and Radeon got easier with GCN
    Writing an efficient compute application definitely got easier with GCN, and we believe that implementing an optimized shader compiler got easier as well, but writing a driver was probably 10x as much work as it would have been if SI were just another evolution of the R600=>NI architecture. Maybe closer to 20x.
    Last edited by bridgman; 04-14-2012 at 02:13 PM.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bridgman View Post
    Writing an efficient compute application definitely got easier with GCN, and we believe that implementing an optimized shader compiler got easier as well, but writing a driver was probably 10x as much work as it would have been if SI were just another evolution of the R600=>NI architecture. Maybe closer to 20x.
    much work is not hard work. its easier but because of the restart its 20x much work.

    whatever RIP VLIW.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,383

    Default

    I haven't seen any indication that writing a driver for GCN is any "easier" than for VLIW, except when it comes to seriously optimizing the shader compiler.

    The VLIW hardware actually worked out real well from a shader compiler POV, since most of the IR operations were on 3- or 4-component vertices and fragments and so each IR operation could be translated directly into a single 3- or 4-slot VLIW instruction.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    6,607

    Default

    Well somehow there do not exist any fast opengl drivers for ati cards. Not even using win where you can compare opengl against dx11 you see good drivers. For linux you see lots of artefacts using rage with wine (hd 5670 if you forgot it). It would be just too funny when oss drivers would beat fglrx in some years...

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bridgman View Post
    I haven't seen any indication that writing a driver for GCN is any "easier" than for VLIW, except when it comes to seriously optimizing the shader compiler.

    The VLIW hardware actually worked out real well from a shader compiler POV, since most of the IR operations were on 3- or 4-component vertices and fragments and so each IR operation could be translated directly into a single 3- or 4-slot VLIW instruction.
    i already point out that the most linux gurus are focused on: x86_64+simd(sse/AVX)
    this means its easier for the "Linux-Nerds"

    a general truth can be untruth in a specially case. and linux nerds are special case's.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kano View Post
    Well somehow there do not exist any fast opengl drivers for ati cards. Not even using win where you can compare opengl against dx11 you see good drivers. For linux you see lots of artefacts using rage with wine (hd 5670 if you forgot it). It would be just too funny when oss drivers would beat fglrx in some years...
    thatís for sure! i play very well with the radeon driver and my hd4770 card.

    the point is the catalyst makes headache and it doesnít worth it!

    in your right words the catalyst is a "directX" driver! not a openGL driver.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    6,607

    Default

    no, i used heaven on win7 to compare opengl+dx11. but heaven+fglrx is even slower than win+opengl. win+dx11 scales with cf.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    989

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qaridarium View Post
    that’s for sure! i play very well with the radeon driver and my hd4770 card.

    the point is the catalyst makes headache and it doesn’t worth it!

    in your right words the catalyst is a "directX" driver! not a openGL driver.
    Yeah, and this is why I'm waiting for RadeonSI to be viable. But in the mean time, I have to use fglrx, where I scroll the browser window and have to wait almost a whole second for the driver to catch up. I get a better rendering performance on the Intel driver on my little 965GM.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    351

    Default

    the only time i got good performance with a FOSS driver other than intel's was with a dell with a 7xxx chip. the effects were so smooth and fast. I was really impressed. honestly i've never had performance issues with intel drivers from 965 and on. nouveau on the other hand is a crapshoot of kernel panics and artifacts.

Posting Permissions

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