R200 performance

[solca]

I have seen comparisions between the open source R200 driver and fglrx and the open source driver was always slower.

That not counting that fglrx was slower than the Windows driver.

Somebody knows why is that?
What is missing to have an open source R200 driver as fast as the windows driver?

[chrisr]

Some of us still have R200 cards that work very well. But that doesn't mean that they can't be made to work better...

[Michael]

Perhaps some of it can be explained in this article @ http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...item=743&num=1

[chrisr]

Originally Posted by Michael

Perhaps some of it can be explained in this article @ http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...item=743&num=1

I'm not sure what your "it" is, but I'm wondering if AMD might wish to re-release the R200 specs without an NDA, seeing as it's prepared to do the same thing for it's more recent R500/R600 cards. It would be great to see these cards realise their potential, especially since I still have one...

[Michael]

Originally Posted by chrisr

I'm not sure what your "it" is, but I'm wondering if AMD might wish to re-release the R200 specs without an NDA, seeing as it's prepared to do the same thing for it's more recent R500/R600 cards. It would be great to see these cards realise their potential, especially since I still have one...

I can ask them but I would doubt it just since they wouldn't want to spend their time on the old chips they basically care nothing about, but we'll see.

[chrisr]

Originally Posted by Michael

I can ask them but I would doubt it just since they wouldn't want to spend their time on the old chips they basically care nothing about, but we'll see.

The simplest way to rid itself of any further R200 questions would be to dump the old specs with someone like the OSI . Ideally more complete specs, but *exactly the same specs* as last time would still be a "win" of sorts.

[solca]

Originally Posted by Michael

I can ask them but I would doubt it just since they wouldn't want to spend their time on the old chips they basically care nothing about, but we'll see.

Ask them please... R200 is still important for many laptops users, the current driver performs as 1/4 the windows driver which obviously sucks, developer man power without specs is useless.

By the way thanks for your excellent site!

[yoshi314]

I can ask them but I would doubt it just since they wouldn't want to spend their time on the old chips they basically care nothing about, but we'll see.

that's the perfect reason to DO it.

they don't want to support r200 - fine. let the community take care of it. provided that they give specs.

[Alcoholic Synonymous]

I can provide an even bigger reason for them to do it:

http://www.walmart.com/catalog/produ...uct_id=4765188

Catalyst 6.5 was the official (and somewhat under the radar) End of Life for the r200s. How long ago was that now? And these chips are still on the shelves of one of the worlds largest retailers? It would make sense to release the docs.

Of course, unless they do release the r200 spec, I won't be upgrading to another AMD/ATI system (like my current one) ever again.

[stunted]

An even easer option for them would be to release Dave Arlied (and maybe others) from his original NDA, he could then make public the specs he has and we'd have working XvMC for r200 amongst other things.