Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Intel Releases 2.3 RC Driver w/ XvMC

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Intel Releases 2.3 RC Driver w/ XvMC

    Phoronix: Intel Releases 2.3 RC Driver w/ XvMC

    In Linux graphics news unrelated to the recent ATI/AMD excitements, Intel has just released the xf86-video-intel 2.2.99.901 driver. This driver is meant to serve as the first release candidate for what will become xf86-video-intel 2.3.0...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=NjQwMA

  • #2
    The role of contributors

    Something I don't get: are u free to contribute to Intel driver making or is it an open but strictly fore inteleers project?

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Pickup View Post
      Something I don't get: are u free to contribute to Intel driver making or is it an open but strictly fore inteleers project?

      If you write a valid patch or anything, there should be no trouble getting it pushed into their master branch. They don't check you for an Intel employee ID card before looking at your work
      Michael Larabel
      http://www.michaellarabel.com/

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Pickup View Post
        Something I don't get: are u free to contribute to Intel driver making or is it an open but strictly fore inteleers project?
        Heh... As Michael has indicated, it's Open- but like at least a few FOSS projects one can care to mention (OpenOffice, for example), a major industry player is bankrolling several of the developers on the project. Intel sees the value of having GOOD drivers on Linux and they're providing them- largely the way they're supposed to. AMD's in the process of doing the very same thing. One would hope NVidia would follow suit, but it may be a little bit before that happens- specifically, it may take a high-performer from AMD or Intel that has it's drivers in a FOSS manner on Linux to spur them to change their position on technical specs or driver code itself.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Svartalf View Post
          Heh... As Michael has indicated, it's Open- but like at least a few FOSS projects one can care to mention (OpenOffice, for example), a major industry player is bankrolling several of the developers on the project. Intel sees the value of having GOOD drivers on Linux and they're providing them- largely the way they're supposed to. AMD's in the process of doing the very same thing. One would hope NVidia would follow suit, but it may be a little bit before that happens- specifically, it may take a high-performer from AMD or Intel that has it's drivers in a FOSS manner on Linux to spur them to change their position on technical specs or driver code itself.
          Intel may have made good drivers for most of their cards, but their drivers for the 965-3000 Series are not that good at all.. After all, they just recently released the documents for them, and it will take some time before the drivers are as good as their older ones.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Extreme Coder View Post
            Intel may have made good drivers for most of their cards, but their drivers for the 965-3000 Series are not that good at all.. After all, they just recently released the documents for them, and it will take some time before the drivers are as good as their older ones.
            Considering that they were written using those selfsame documents- BY Intel and Tungsten Graphics...

            From the Intel OpenSource Drivers site on the eve of the new drivers we're now using:

            "As with any free software project, this release represents only the beginning of an ongoing commitment by Intel to work with the X.org and Mesa communities to continuously improve and enhance the drivers. While these drivers represent significant work at both Tungsten Graphics and Intel—as our first release of this code—they're still in need of significant testing, tuning, and bug fixing before they will be ready for production use. We're releasing them now to demonstrate our ongoing commitment to providing free software drivers for Intel hardware."

            It's not that we didn't have the help from them in the form of the documentation- there's a disconnect between what we're doing in Mesa/DRI and what we need to be doing to get peak performance. We do not have an optimizing shader compiler, which, actually, is critical to peak speed on the GMA X3000/X3100/X3500 parts. The same goes for a goodly portion of that gap between what we'd accomplished from the R300 RE efforts and the performance levels of the fglrx, such as it is. In the case of fglrx drivers being "slow" compared to the Windows ones, they've likely got a problem reconciling interrupt handling differences between Windows and Linux (i.e. You can't just take that which works well with Windows and just shove it into Linux in many cases- the schedulers are different and cute userspace stunts that work well or adequate in Windows just simply WON'T work in Linux...) and they're introducing a pipeline stall in there somewhere. Now, I could be wrong, it may be something else- but having seen that one play out several times over the years (and having to help the client sort it out...) it's a likely culprit.

            Comment


            • #7
              If it was only a case of not-so-high performance, I'd be OK with that, but as I made another thread with a list of games that don't work with it(and nobody replied to ), I was hoping they would fix that.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Extreme Coder View Post
                If it was only a case of not-so-high performance, I'd be OK with that, but as I made another thread with a list of games that don't work with it(and nobody replied to ), I was hoping they would fix that.
                Which games would they be?

                Comment


                • #9
                  I tried ioquake3 on my Laptop and it's running fine on a X3100. Not a 100%-esque 60fps on 1280x800, but Quake is playable. I also tried UT2004 but even with the worst detail-configuration I can't reach more than stable 20fps throughout the game. Open Arena runs mostly fine, Nexuiz is unplayable and Alien Arena is on par with Open Arena.

                  It's a great chipset for Compiz. It seems more fluid than Compiz with Nvidia (and AIGLX on).

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Sounds like the shader based titles might be the cause of the issue- which wouldn't be surprising.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      http://phoronix.com/forums/showthread.php?t=8347
                      Is there any hope in this getting fixed?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Svartalf
                        1) The games that you think are "simpler" aren't. They use differing pieces of the OpenGL spec. (ET uses the IdTech 4 engine- that means the stuff's Vertex and Fragment shader happy... It's not going to fare well, period, on your GPU- no Vertex Shader support present that's even remotely viable until Gallium3D shows up for you...)

                        2) Tribal Trouble has a batch of odd issues with ATI parts. It wouldn't surprise me that they encounter a problem with the title. Some of their coding, while technically valid, it does read some "may" entries in the OpenGL spec as one way when they should read it as a "Shall" and avoid doing them. It might be that they've encountered that. I'll check with my i945 machine when I get a chance.

                        3) Per the Regnum Online site: The following cards are still on a experimental stage. This means that we still didn't have the chance to test them properly. You could possibly play with these cards but there maybe glitches or unexpected crashes in some cases:
                        The i945 is ON that list.


                        The only one that I would consider to be a "real" problem might be the Tribal Trouble one at this point as it should work right on it, so long as they're not using any shader derived work in the game. If they are, all bets are clean off for your GPU- and it's not due to the drivers either.
                        I am not really angry about the ETQW issue, since I don't care really too much about it, it would be too slow if it ran anyways..

                        And about Regnum Online: I had an older PC with an Intel IGP in it(the 850 to be exact), and Regnum ran fine on it. So, why shouldn't the more advanced IGP be able to?

                        And I also want to know what does that common error message mean :/

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Extreme Coder View Post
                          I am not really angry about the ETQW issue, since I don't care really too much about it, it would be too slow if it ran anyways..

                          And about Regnum Online: I had an older PC with an Intel IGP in it(the 850 to be exact), and Regnum ran fine on it. So, why shouldn't the more advanced IGP be able to?

                          And I also want to know what does that common error message mean :/
                          Lemme restate it... I'd had issues with remembering my GPU numbers... So my statements might have been a bit wrong on a few things... I'm digging right now for the core problem on the error- I think the game devs are cheating on something and they are relying on the driver to fix it for them, looking at the error. I could be wrong there, though... Give me a bit here and I'll post a new comment...

                          As for the "more advanced GPU"- part of my error is that I'd missed the GPU choice. It's an X3xxx series GPU- so it's going to go through differing pathways by default. Including using shader based operations; so you may have a bug in a game that's fine for the preceeding part, but not so fine for the more advanced part.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Svartalf View Post
                            Lemme restate it... I'd had issues with remembering my GPU numbers... So my statements might have been a bit wrong on a few things... I'm digging right now for the core problem on the error- I think the game devs are cheating on something and they are relying on the driver to fix it for them, looking at the error. I could be wrong there, though... Give me a bit here and I'll post a new comment...
                            Sure, feel free to do what you want
                            After all, I'm not forcing you

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Ok... Googling... (Heh... You'd have found this yourself with this...) I found out that the git repository versions seem to work mostly like they're supposed to with some texture corruption issues. Gentoo people aren't having issues and if you're bold, you can probably solve the issue yourself.

                              Heh... I have a suspicion that it's still something that they ought not have done (I've seen far, far more than my fair share of code that does things that it might ought to not do that the drivers end up having to compensate for...) and the fix is to sidestep something that they did that was "wrong" that NVidia cleans up after the developer with (And, YES, they DO have edges in their OpenGL implementation that do that sort of thing...).

                              By the way, I've retracted my comments- they were partly in error and you now have what appears to be a fix for your friend.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X