Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Bettering Radeon Gallium3D Performance With PCI-E 2.0

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

  • #31
    AMD has a shared codebase and a proprietary driver with lots of developers, while intel has only the open source one.
    I would be glad if AMD will drop catalyst for linux and shift 50 developers to mesa, unfortunately the vast majority of the users do not care about the "free speech" if there is the "free beer".
    ## VGA ##
    AMD: X1950XTX, HD3870, HD5870
    Intel: GMA45, HD3000 (Core i5 2500K)

    Comment


    • #32
      unfortunately the vast majority of the users do not care about the "free speech" if there is the "free beer".
      They don't care about Free speech at all. They rather even pay for the beer. Not because they don't think it's better, they just care about other things more.


      It's the same with everything. We all know, that 'green' is better for everyone, the planet, personal health etc. Yet we don't care enough (this has changed a little in recent years).

      Very very sad, but very very true.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by darkbasic View Post
        I would be glad if AMD will drop catalyst for linux and shift 50 developers to mesa...
        And they probably would if it made sense. But since Linux' graphics stack is a moving target, what would that accomplish? Plus, they'd still have to maintain Catalyst for Windows anyway.
        For all the good things OSS does, there's an equal amount of ego that makes sure developers will never agree on a standard solution. And this is the reason OSS can't penetrate certain markets.

        Comment


        • #34
          How do I put this command when booting the kernel?

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by ChrisXY View Post
            But I imagine looking at e.g. the power saving code could still tell a very good programmer why radeon on the "low" profile still uses more power than fglrx.

            I mean, why doesn't AMD simply have somebody going over the code of catalyst, deleting everything patented or "secret" and release the nonfunctional rest? Could still be helpful for low level stuff like power saving and communicating properly with the hardware...
            the answer is simple: rewriting the code complete new is cheaper and cleaner and more save in law and do have higher security standart.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by bug77 View Post
              And they probably would if it made sense. But since Linux' graphics stack is a moving target, what would that accomplish? Plus, they'd still have to maintain Catalyst for Windows anyway.
              I'm not sure if it's legally-possible, but a shared FOSS driver stack on Windows might help AMD too. The Linux graphics stack is a moving target but, AFAIK, Gallium should do fairly well in terms of OS abstraction. They'd just need to make releases, i.e. pick, compile and bundle the various bits and pieces like distros do, while offloading some of the coding burden to the community (including the Linux people for the common parts).

              The problem is the FOSS stack is behind Catalyst in terms of features and performance and I'm not sure anybody has done that work for Windows, which is quite a disincentive at the moment.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by darkbasic View Post
                AMD has a shared codebase and a proprietary driver with lots of developers, while intel has only the open source one.
                I would be glad if AMD will drop catalyst for linux and shift 50 developers to mesa, unfortunately the vast majority of the users do not care about the "free speech" if there is the "free beer".
                The announcement for this comes probably tomorrow or the day after tomorrow.

                I got a tip about this tropic today.

                Comment


                • #38
                  This has been addressed before, but the closed source driver has a completely different coding style and kernel/userspace interfaces. Most of the code would have to be completely rewritten before it had even a remote chance of making it upstream. There are plenty of OS-agnostic drivers out there (realtek, etc.) who release common shaded code for all OSes and it never gets merged upstream because the coding styles don't match or the driver uses it's own infrastructure for certain things rather than some common infrastructure provided by the kernel. It's not really feasible to redesign the entire closed source driver (much of which is planned years in advance as new chips and initiatives are planned) just so it could be shared more easily with open source. The market for open source drivers just isn't big enough.

                  And before you reply, yes, I know, chicken and egg.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by agd5f View Post
                    The market for open source drivers just isn't big enough.
                    And before you reply, yes, I know, chicken and egg.
                    sure you are a nice dev but economic isn't your strength.

                    In economic you deal with the future not with the past or with the presence.

                    this means the grow factor is more important than the market-share.

                    right now linux do have 3,5%(2%andorid) market share (source: wikipedia.org) and a grow rate of 40% every 6 month (source: Net Applications ).
                    and market analyst found out that nearly 80% of all companys wana grow there opensource usage to lower costs. (source: linux foundation market survey)

                    just do the mathematics: calculate grow rate 40% every 6 month on the market share 1,5%

                    this numbers prove : Microsoft is allready death

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by bug77 View Post
                      And they probably would if it made sense.
                      They don't and they will never because:

                      1) Peoples do not care.
                      2) Catalyst is made of share code for the 90% of it and the linux team is very little (20? 30? maybe even 50 peoples?) because of that, those developers alone wouldn't be able to develop a competitive stack because the shared part is made by thousands of developers.

                      Peoples will care about free software only if someone will find a way to stop piracy, when they will have to pay 600$ for a microsoft office suite plus another 600$ for a retail copy of windows just because someone sent them a fucked .doc (or whatever they call it in office 20${XY}) something will change.
                      ## VGA ##
                      AMD: X1950XTX, HD3870, HD5870
                      Intel: GMA45, HD3000 (Core i5 2500K)

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by darkbasic View Post
                        2) Catalyst is made of share code for the 90% of it and the linux team is very little (20? 30? maybe even 50 peoples?) because of that, those developers alone wouldn't be able to develop a competitive stack because the shared part is made by thousands of developers.
                        Exactly. That's the primary reason proprietary drivers exist at all for open OSes -- they let you share code with proprietary OSes and as a consequence deliver a lot more functionality and performance than the same number of developers could provide in a separate code base.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by darkbasic View Post
                          Peoples will care about free software only if someone will find a way to stop piracy, when they will have to pay 600$ for a microsoft office suite plus another 600$ for a retail copy of windows just because someone sent them a fucked .doc (or whatever they call it in office 20${XY}) something will change.
                          windows8 fix this for you TCPA to stop piracy.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            So what are the plans for using pcie_gen2=1 by default? Couldn't the incompatible motherboards be blacklisted instead of turning it off for everyone?

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by bridgman View Post
                              Exactly. That's the primary reason proprietary drivers exist at all for open OSes -- they let you share code with proprietary OSes and as a consequence deliver a lot more functionality and performance than the same number of developers could provide in a separate code base.
                              galium3d is supposed to do the same -share code among OSes- but i haven't seen anyone jumping on it and releasing an FOSS driver for all OSes

                              too big of a change i assume but anyway

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by darkbasic View Post
                                Peoples will care about free software only if someone will find a way to stop piracy, when they will have to pay 600$ for a microsoft office suite plus another 600$ for a retail copy of windows just because someone sent them a fucked .doc (or whatever they call it in office 20${XY}) something will change.
                                But companies generally care about that sort of legal stuff. I do wonder why exactly FOSS adoption isn't all that commonplace in companies, even partial adoption (e.g. some free office suite on Windows), especially when your employees don't have specific requirements. It could be MS gives you a better TCO/risk, it could be free stuff indeed has some rough edges or it could be management isn't comfortable with saying "no, ask for documents in a non-proprietary format from your contacts/customers". In any case, I guess it's easy to conclude proprietary software is the way to go and not give it a second thought, since it obviously worked out for many others.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X