Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMD Radeon Gallium3D More Competitive With Catalyst On Linux

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

  • #11
    These are really good results!

    In many benchmarks, the 70-90% target has been reached, which is fantastic. There is a lag with ridiculously high FPS, which is expected and irrelevant, and in some games (Doom3, RQuake). But these games should be examined so specific bottlenecks causing the performance drops can be found and addressed.

    With UVD already here, GL3.3 around the corner, good performance, OpenCL progress and (hopefully) proper power management coming soon, this could be an amazing year for AMD users!

    Comment


    • #12
      Originally posted by GreatEmerald View Post
      But that's what the freedesktop wiki is for.
      It's nearly there, but according to this:

      http://www.x.org/wiki/RadeonFeature#...Radeon_Drivers

      Radeon power management looks like done when its only static PM I suppose, and HDMI audio is marked as DONE for several generations, while AFAIK its not really on par with the windows driver yet, so something more subtle may be missing.

      Comment


      • #13
        Awesome work, congratulation to the developers!

        Maybe by the time the OSS drivers are able to fully support Steam games (OpenGL wise) the OSS radeon drivers will be close enough to finally forget about catalyst and then i can upgrade to xorg-server 1.14. I still have a feeling there's a lot of performance optimizations left unfound or unpolished, but it's really awesome to see that it doing GL2 games running so well now. I'll have to try it in a few months (when this stuff is on Arch) and see how well Blender performs under the OSS drivers.

        Comment


        • #14
          It would be nice if there was benchmark that could put drivers on their knees, for example....Heaven.

          Comment


          • #15
            Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
            These are really good results!

            In many benchmarks, the 70-90% target has been reached, which is fantastic. There is a lag with ridiculously high FPS, which is expected and irrelevant, and in some games (Doom3, RQuake). But these games should be examined so specific bottlenecks causing the performance drops can be found and addressed.

            With UVD already here, GL3.3 around the corner, good performance, OpenCL progress and (hopefully) proper power management coming soon, this could be an amazing year for AMD users!
            3.2 is more important. OSX use 3.2 excessively, and apps on Win are using DX (more likely). So people will tend to have 3.2 code paths for the sake of OSX compa. Games also should pick 3.2 (as this give 95% of Steam market...), while 4.x will still for some time be add-on, as it require up to date drivers on win, mean no osx support, and binarys on Lin.

            Yes 3.3 will mark "full" OpenGL support for class-DX11 hw, but otherwise 3.2 support is more important (and we will get them both in same mesa release at least for intel & r600g)

            Comment


            • #16
              Might be a good idea to benchmark games that people actually play.

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by przemoli View Post
                Yes 3.3 will mark "full" OpenGL support for class-DX11 hw...
                Did you mean "DX10" ?

                Comment


                • #18
                  i just wonder where these improvements come from since...
                  "R600g Tests Show Little Change On Mesa 9.2-devel"
                  http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...tem&px=MTM1MzY

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Originally posted by jakubo View Post
                    i just wonder where these improvements come from since...
                    "R600g Tests Show Little Change On Mesa 9.2-devel"
                    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...tem&px=MTM1MzY
                    Code clean ups maybe, bug fixes, things like that, Or maybe its just specific card generations (i didnt compare the two articles so for all i know they are the same cards in both).

                    maybe someone through in a sleep(1) in the gfx stack as an april fools prank and it just got pulled out

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Originally posted by bridgman View Post
                      Did you mean "DX10" ?
                      He probably meant DX11 features, which could be back-ported on DX10 class hardware.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X