Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Bridgman Is No Longer "The AMD Open-Source Guy"

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

  • #46
    Originally posted by smitty3268 View Post
    The guy working on video decode for AMD was Christian König, i think, and he continued in that role after getting hired for AMD. I'm not sure he ever got beyond MPEG2, though - i don't think there's been much work on h264 from the AMD side, or at least not publicly.

    I think lately he's been working on getting the radeonsi driver working.
    Yep, it was indeed Christian. However, all that's visible from AMD these days are for either radeonsi or r600/llvm improvements. Not something that is useful right now for most people...

    Thanks for Bridgman so far and please keep us informed about HSA!
    Welcome Tim!

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by smitty3268 View Post
      The guy working on video decode for AMD was Christian König
      You're right, I'm sorry Christian
      ## VGA ##
      AMD: X1950XTX, HD3870, HD5870
      Intel: GMA45, HD3000 (Core i5 2500K)

      Comment


      • #48
        LLVM is something we need for OpenCL i think. And yes i was referring to C.Konig.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by darkbasic View Post
          What about h.264/webm shader based decoding? Is there someone still working on it?
          Well, if somebody is still working on it than it's probably me

          No really, I started evaluating if shader based h.264 makes sense or not when I started working for AMD, and got a demo working using parts of ffmpeg code and the simple MC and IDCT shaders originally used for MPEG2 acceleration.

          Unfortunately the outcome was that even with a really lot of effort (and we are talking about really lot of effort) the improvement that could be archived would never be more than 20%, while full hardware based decoding promised to easily accelerate more than 90% of the whole decoding process.

          So what I've done after that is actually looking if, when, how we could ever be able to release UVD and where the pitfalls are. But I can't really say when and or if we are going to release it, it might be tomorrow, it might be next year, but it could also be never.

          Christian.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Deathsimple View Post
            Well, if somebody is still working on it than it's probably me

            No really, I started evaluating if shader based h.264 makes sense or not when I started working for AMD, and got a demo working using parts of ffmpeg code and the simple MC and IDCT shaders originally used for MPEG2 acceleration.

            Unfortunately the outcome was that even with a really lot of effort (and we are talking about really lot of effort) the improvement that could be archived would never be more than 20%, while full hardware based decoding promised to easily accelerate more than 90% of the whole decoding process.

            So what I've done after that is actually looking if, when, how we could ever be able to release UVD and where the pitfalls are. But I can't really say when and or if we are going to release it, it might be tomorrow, it might be next year, but it could also be never.

            Christian.
            So basically you are saying, that shaders just aren't up for the task? E.g. the workload not parallelizeble enough or the shaders just aren't powerful enough for the amount of work needing to be done etc...

            Those are very interesting findings actually basically meaning, "uvd" in any form (xvba, vpdau, cedarx etc etc) is here to stay, and won't ever be replaced by shaders/opencl.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Deathsimple View Post
              So what I've done after that is actually looking if, when, how we could ever be able to release UVD and where the pitfalls are. But I can't really say when and or if we are going to release it, it might be tomorrow, it might be next year, but it could also be never.

              Christian.

              How is that possible, that Intel has open source video acceleration for a long time (from the beginning?) on (AFAIK) nearly all graphics chips, and AMD can't do it ? And they still support DRM and HDCP on Windows - as we can see, it can be done...

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Deathsimple View Post
                Well, if somebody is still working on it than it's probably me

                No really, I started evaluating if shader based h.264 makes sense or not when I started working for AMD, and got a demo working using parts of ffmpeg code and the simple MC and IDCT shaders originally used for MPEG2 acceleration.

                Unfortunately the outcome was that even with a really lot of effort (and we are talking about really lot of effort) the improvement that could be archived would never be more than 20%, while full hardware based decoding promised to easily accelerate more than 90% of the whole decoding process.

                So what I've done after that is actually looking if, when, how we could ever be able to release UVD and where the pitfalls are. But I can't really say when and or if we are going to release it, it might be tomorrow, it might be next year, but it could also be never.

                Christian.
                So this also means that accelerated webm is also out of the question. (UVD doesn't support it and shaders are not good enough)

                Personally i have no hope for UVD being released.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Sad! This directly translates to "buy Intel".

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by 89c51 View Post
                    So this also means that accelerated webm is also out of the question. (UVD doesn't support it and shaders are not good enough)

                    Personally i have no hope for UVD being released.
                    Pretty much looks like it, yes...

                    Btw, does anybody know of an attempt to reverse engineer the UVD functionality?
                    If there hasn't been such an attempt - why not?

                    Maybe there are good technical arguments why this is practically impossible. (?)
                    Last edited by entropy; 09-21-2012, 06:46 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by entropy View Post
                      +1

                      Fully agree, thank you Bridgman.
                      Hope you'll be around here from time to time.
                      coudnt have sayd it better

                      also, welcome Mr. Tim

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by 89c51 View Post
                        So this also means that accelerated webm is also out of the question. (UVD doesn't support it and shaders are not good enough)

                        Personally i have no hope for UVD being released.
                        That is not 100% true, cause I've only looked into H264. I'm not deeply enough into webm to actually judge if it's possible to accelerate that efficiently with shaders. The big issue with H264 is it's CAVLC/CABAC coding of the input stream, which in turn is a complete linear process.

                        All the other stages are more or less doable with shaders, but because they are doable with shaders also mean they are doable with (for example) SSE. So you need to compare the optimal doable CPU based implementation with the overhead of moving all the data bitstream decoding produces GPU ram, setting up everything etc...

                        Christian.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Deathsimple View Post
                          That is not 100% true, cause I've only looked into H264. I'm not deeply enough into webm to actually judge if it's possible to accelerate that efficiently with shaders. The big issue with H264 is it's CAVLC/CABAC coding of the input stream, which in turn is a complete linear process.

                          All the other stages are more or less doable with shaders, but because they are doable with shaders also mean they are doable with (for example) SSE. So you need to compare the optimal doable CPU based implementation with the overhead of moving all the data bitstream decoding produces GPU ram, setting up everything etc...

                          Christian.
                          Thanks for the answer.

                          Veerapan who worked on webm might be able to give us some info.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by twriter View Post
                            John already answered that question. We've been doing a lot of work but we don't yet know if/when we can release. That's all I can say for now.
                            Tim
                            How about if I show up at your office at five tonight with beer and women?

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by droidhacker View Post
                              How about if I show up at your office at five tonight with beer and women?
                              Probably Tin and Bridgman are not the ones to please in order to get things done. If it was up to them i bet we'd have it already.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by 89c51 View Post
                                Probably Tin and Bridgman are not the ones to please in order to get things done. If it was up to them i bet we'd have it already.
                                Yah, obviously you didn't get the joke.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X