Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Radeon OpenGL 2.0 support

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by madman2k View Post
    nothing personal. I would have just preferred to have a feature complete Open Source driver, before AMD cut off the closed source support.
    Right now I ended up without power management and without OpenGL3, which I would have with the closed source drivers.
    Right. Sue the mob that forced you to upgrade to X server 1.6 and a too new kernels at a gunpoint?

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by nanonyme View Post
      Right. Sue the mob that forced you to upgrade to X server 1.6 and a too new kernels at a gunpoint?
      well compare ubuntu 8.04 with ubuntu 9.10, write down the differences and you have the mob

      but once again; basically I am searching vertex program documentations.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by madman2k View Post
        but once again; basically I am searching vertex program documentations.
        Search for "OpenGL extension registry" which will lead you to this page where you can obtain the official specification for any extension. That's all I've ever worked it (the spec even contains example programs!).

        I'm sure there are other resources elsewhere, it's just that I personally have never used those.

        Comment


        • #19
          I didn't think the R500 series could do OpenGL3, I thought they were limited to 2.1 anyway?

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by monkeynut View Post
            I didn't think the R500 series could do OpenGL3, I thought they were limited to 2.1 anyway?
            They can't probably do full 3.0 but can also likely go over 2.1. (as in, they can likely accomplish *part* of the extensions required)
            Edit: When people say "support for version X", it means support for full version X. You can still have almost all of the extensions available and this will Just Work as long as the application doesn't hit the extensions that aren't supported.
            Last edited by nanonyme; 10-01-2009, 05:20 PM.

            Comment


            • #21
              So just wondering what is the gallium3d for r600/700 cards... I know that I can use fglrx but I like to make things as simple and open source as possible... If I had any idea how to do graphics programming I would start to help out(I can code a small amount in c and a good amount c++), better question... where would be a good place to start on anything like that?

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by zeldaman55069 View Post
                So just wondering what is the gallium3d for r600/700 cards... I know that I can use fglrx but I like to make things as simple and open source as possible... If I had any idea how to do graphics programming I would start to help out(I can code a small amount in c and a good amount c++), better question... where would be a good place to start on anything like that?
                Afaik hasn't really started. I'm not sure there's much documentation available, you could probably start by looking into the r300g driver. (including r600 classic driver's KMS-side to find out about the hardware-dependent code)

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by madman2k View Post
                  since you decided to cripple my R500 card with open-source drivers
                  Who the hell does 'you' refer to?

                  Do you realize that nhaehnle doesn't work for AMD and does all this for fun?

                  And by the way, it's not crippling if it's never been supported.

                  Sorry, I just am _really_ tired of seeing ridiculous comments and accusations like this.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by mattst88 View Post
                    Who the hell does 'you' refer to?

                    Do you realize that nhaehnle doesn't work for AMD and does all this for fun?

                    And by the way, it's not crippling if it's never been supported.

                    Sorry, I just am _really_ tired of seeing ridiculous comments and accusations like this.
                    I am referring to god and the blatant unfairness that nhaehnle does not fix the hunger in the development countries - he is a developer right?

                    seriously, I was referring to the guy I quoted in my post

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      I'm going to press you on this.

                      You're claiming that bridgman crippled R500 support in the open source drivers? Tell me _when_ this happened. _When_ were they working perfectly for you?

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by nanonyme View Post
                        They can't probably do full 3.0 but can also likely go over 2.1. (as in, they can likely accomplish *part* of the extensions required)
                        Edit: When people say "support for version X", it means support for full version X. You can still have almost all of the extensions available and this will Just Work as long as the application doesn't hit the extensions that aren't supported.
                        Which I suppose leads me to a question.... Lets say your running a card that doesnt support an opengl extension in hardware, but your running an application that uses that extension. Will it simply fall back to software rendering for that extension alone and continue running the rest in hardware?

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          It depends on the extension. Some extensions actually do things (draw, compress/decompress etc..) so performing only those extension calls in software is feasible, but many extensions change the way that other drawing operations are handled -- so all of the subsequent drawing operations would need to be done in software as well.

                          In those cases it might be better if the driver did not support the extension at all, or supported it and effectively ignored it.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Apps are supposed to check if the driver supports an extension before using it.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by mattst88 View Post
                              I'm going to press you on this.

                              You're claiming that bridgman crippled R500 support in the open source drivers? Tell me _when_ this happened. _When_ were they working perfectly for you?
                              He's saying that AMD stopped supporting R500 in fglrx I believe. So he has to use the open driver which doesn't support OpenGL 2 like fglrx did.
                              I think Ubuntu 9.04 has a special fglrx that supports R500 though...

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                fglrx will still work with his hardware if he doesn't mind using a supported kernel and xserver.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X