Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 88

Thread: AMD Has Open-Source Driver For HD 8000 Series

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Rural Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    1,019

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by enrico.tagliavini View Post
    AMD really has to review its release process. Let's start with a fact: the main uses of the open source radeon driver are modesetting and 2D (and I mean display the desktop with better performance then a cirrus card). 3D is not really an option and you can also live without compositing. Gaming is not even allowed in dreams. This will not change anytime soon.
    I must be dreaming then - I game on R600g all the time. And run composted desktops on it. Have you ever actually used it for these purposes or are you just going on accusations or here-say? It may not have the most performant 3D, but it works and it is stable, even on RadeonSI it now appears. And I do not think I am abusing the local power grid by using it, although I do admit the manual power-save modes are working really well for me for whatever reason.

    I would say the main reason for the free radeon drivers, if you want to give them some specific technical objective, is to have a mainline kernel driver for the cards that offer out of the box support and better legacy compatibility. Mode setting and 2D are of course a part of this, but that does not minimize the other work.
    Last edited by Hamish Wilson; 02-06-2013 at 01:07 PM.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,926

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hamish Wilson View Post
    I must be dreaming then - I game on R600g all the time.
    Yeah, I finished Doom3 and Prey on r600g years ago, but this is astroturf FUD marketing. He doesn't care, he just posts what he's paid to post.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    655

    Default

    Since nobody explicitly meantioned it already:

    AMD team is on good track. They publish their drivers for new hardware, earlier and earlier with each generation. (7xxx was victim of new architecture and 8xxx which could be served in time!)

    So for 9xxx there will be good support BEFORE release. That mean many thing:
    1) AMD folks will have more time, since they will not have to start work on next gen hw, right away.
    2) AMD folks will have more time, since they will not have to deal with hw bugs on their own, since Catalyst team will be also interested in resolving them.
    3) AMD folks will be "more productive", since they will release code in smaller packages, but for longer time spans. (Now its big pushes for each hw)
    4) AMD folks will be "more productive", since they priority number one "get pre-release support done!" will take less time, leaving them more time on pushing new OpenGL stuff.
    5) AMD folks will be "more productive", since they will be able to molest their legal department more often for permission to release various bits and pieces.

    Hmm. Its time to see how my 5720M is doing with r600g

    PS Do not school Michael for his messy understanding of the state of radeonSI. Grab PTS and upload some test results to OpenBenchmarking.org. And send him links :P (Or share on MESA mailing list, since he have some automated spiders tracking such stuff )

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by przemoli View Post
    So for 9xxx there will be good support BEFORE release.
    I wouldn't be so sure about that. Seems that the 8xxx cards are just rebrands of the 7xxx ones for the oem market. Can bridgman comment on driver status regarding actual next gen hardware?

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Rio de Janeiro
    Posts
    201

    Default

    I do not question AMD mesa/gallium developer abilities, I don't think anybody here can say they do not do stelar work. R600g is already a very good driver, probably as good as or even better than intel's, IP issues aside.

    The problem lies exactly in the IP issues. I question AMD management's commitment to the open drivers and linux support in general (specially in the consumer space), and how far are they prepared to go to provide proper consumer ready, feature complete bug free linux support of their products. Currently, my understanding is that it is pretty much up to the mesa/gallium devs to write some magical code that is able to perform as desired without revealing any compromising IP. Maybe they will be able to do that, maybe not. Maybe this can only be properly resolved by some other route, such renegociating the license contract with whatever third party IP provider they have, buying said IP, buying the IP holder or release it and risk going to court. But that is outside of the scope of the devs.

    Some of these options are probably completely absurd. But the worse possible alternative is that all of them are, and that only leaves avoid using such IP in future generations, but that will not help current cards. The most we can expect is fomr them is to honestly confirm that features X, Y and Z canot be supported for generations xxx-xxx due to such IP licensing issues. That has been pretty much done for UVD for example.

    What astonishes me is that according to brigdman AMD sees mesa/gallium as the way to go to support consumer GPUs, so fglrx is only a temporary solution, but at the same time, they cannot honestly say that we will be able to see a mesa/gallium feature complete driver in the next 5 yearss. fglrx shouldn't be expected to properly work also (also not feature complete). So what we conclude from that is that for AMD's management, consumer GPU linux support is not even an afterthought. They are pretty much betting all their coins on windows (in the consumer space). That has been a safe bet for the last 25 years, but I personaly do not see a future where windows continues to be only consumer operating system with a decent marketshare. To me, the mobile revolution is much more than simply smartphones and tablets, it is about these quirky, goodlooking and userfriendly OSes that are light, portable and flexible enough to be in every device, providing you with as much information and as much configurability as possible to extract the most from our devices. This resembles a lot AMD's vision of "surround computing", but it is hardly compatible with MS business. Android is what it is today because people are releasing consoles, watches, robots, toaters, fridges, god knows what running the OS, MS cannot compete with that. Will they have some space in next 5-10 years? Sure! Will windows still be the dominant OS? well, hard to say...

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    4,995

    Default

    @Bridgman

    Does 2d on glamor still tear?

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,386

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fa5hion View Post
    I wouldn't be so sure about that. Seems that the 8xxx cards are just rebrands of the 7xxx ones for the oem market. Can bridgman comment on driver status regarding actual next gen hardware?
    Nope

    Quote Originally Posted by Figueiredo View Post
    The problem lies exactly in the IP issues. I question AMD management's commitment to the open drivers and linux support in general (specially in the consumer space), and how far are they prepared to go to provide proper consumer ready, feature complete bug free linux support of their products. Currently, my understanding is that it is pretty much up to the mesa/gallium devs to write some magical code that is able to perform as desired without revealing any compromising IP. Maybe they will be able to do that, maybe not. Maybe this can only be properly resolved by some other route, such renegociating the license contract with whatever third party IP provider they have, buying said IP, buying the IP holder or release it and risk going to court. But that is outside of the scope of the devs.
    One more time -- our commitment is to support community development of open source drivers, and we are going further than that by hiring some really good developers to work on the drivers full time. We are not committing to do all of the open source driver development ourselves and never have.

    Quote Originally Posted by Figueiredo View Post
    Some of these options are probably completely absurd. But the worse possible alternative is that all of them are, and that only leaves avoid using such IP in future generations, but that will not help current cards. The most we can expect is fomr them is to honestly confirm that features X, Y and Z canot be supported for generations xxx-xxx due to such IP licensing issues. That has been pretty much done for UVD for example.
    That is not what we said at all. What we said was (a) we were not including a commitment for *any* UVD support in the initial announcement, (b) that we would work internally to see what could be done, and (c) that where we did find obstacles with releasing programming info for current hardware we would raise the issues internally and see if we could find ways to lift those restrictions in future designs.

    Quote Originally Posted by Figueiredo View Post
    What astonishes me is that according to brigdman AMD sees mesa/gallium as the way to go to support consumer GPUs, so fglrx is only a temporary solution,
    ???

    Um... no. What I said was that I saw fglrx as the way to go for 3D workstation, and that I expected a mix of driver usage for consumer.

    Quote Originally Posted by Figueiredo View Post
    but at the same time, they cannot honestly say that we will be able to see a mesa/gallium feature complete driver in the next 5 yearss.
    It depends on the community resources available to work on it. We will definitely help.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    57

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Figueiredo View Post
    The problem lies exactly in the IP issues. I question AMD management's commitment to the open drivers and linux support in general (specially in the consumer space), and how far are they prepared to go to provide proper consumer ready, feature complete bug free linux support of their products.
    That is a super nice dream for any software. And one which will never come true.


    Quote Originally Posted by bridgman View Post
    One more time -- our commitment is to support community development of open source drivers, and we are going further than that by hiring some really good developers to work on the drivers full time.
    Just curious: Are you looking to increase the number of driver developers?

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Rural Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    1,019

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Asariati View Post
    Just curious: Are you looking to increase the number of driver developers?
    Well, not to dampen anyone's spirits, but considering the recent financial problems at AMD we should count ourselves lucky that none of the ones that they do have already ever seemed to have been considered to be shaved, if you know what I mean.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    ฿ 16LDJ6Hrd1oN3nCoFL7BypHSEYL84ca1JR
    Posts
    1,023

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bridgman View Post
    Um... no. What I said was that I saw fglrx as the way to go for 3D workstation, and that I expected a mix of driver usage for consumer.
    Is "3D workstation" only the firegl "professional" graphics cards? Can a notebook with enduro be a workstation too?

Posting Permissions

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