Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMD's Radeon Gallium3D Starts Posing A Threat To Catalyst

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by bridgman View Post
    Yes, discussions have been underway for a while now.

    Just like last time though -- no guarantees that we'll actually be able to release it no matter how much time we spend on it -- and the older UVDs have even more IP-related challenges than the more recent designs.
    I know that there is nothing you can change about that, but for a customer that answer is simply not satisfying, especially in the light of prematurely deprecating hardware.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by GreatEmerald View Post
      I wonder what's up with the HD 6950.

      Pretty awesome results overall.
      It's a VLIW4 architecture, the rest of them are VLIW5.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by BO$$ View Post
        Big corporations are part of FLOSS? Wasn't that the part that you people wanted to avoid? Corporations controlling 99.99% of the code, even if it's open source?
        As much as I hate BO$$, I have to admit to myself he's got a fucking point right there. I use FLOSS almost exclusively everywhere since years, and to my eyes things are going to (corporate) hell. But hey, tinfoil hat and all that shit, please continue.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by BO$$ View Post
          Big corporations are part of FLOSS? Wasn't that the part that you people wanted to avoid? Corporations controlling 99.99% of the code, even if it's open source?
          Really? FLOSS was invented to keep corporations out? Where did you get that from? And how do they have control over code that anyone can fork at any time?
          And under which stone have you lived that you didn't know that? And why are your statements about amateurs and professionals relevant when you didn't know that?
          Mindless trolling as usual. Get a life.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by 3coma3 View Post
            As much as I hate BO$$, I have to admit to myself he's got a fucking point right there. I use FLOSS almost exclusively everywhere since years, and to my eyes things are going to (corporate) hell. But hey, tinfoil hat and all that shit, please continue.
            It's not like there are dozens gpu driver devs just waiting for their chance to write gpu drivers for free in there spare time. So it is up to the evil corps to do it I guess.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by 3coma3 View Post
              As much as I hate BO$$, I have to admit to myself he's got a fucking point right there. I use FLOSS almost exclusively everywhere since years, and to my eyes things are going to (corporate) hell. But hey, tinfoil hat and all that shit, please continue.
              No he doesn't have a point. The point of OSS models is not about you and me it's about corporations. Think about it. Read some OSS licenses. It's plainly obvious that those who will benefit the most from OSS models are corporations. That's the entire point.

              He missed the glaringly bright "big picture" entirely.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by BO$$ View Post
                Big corporations are part of FLOSS? Wasn't that the part that you people wanted to avoid? Corporations controlling 99.99% of the code, even if it's open source?
                That might just be the stupidest thing BO$$ has ever posted on Phoronix.

                If that was the point of FLOSS, the licenses would prohibit corporations from doing anything with OSS code. Instead, they encourage corporations to contribute. That's sort of the point of doing everything in the open, to get multiple corporations to all work together and benefit from the same codebase. And let individuals do so as well, of course.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Weegee View Post
                  And now do the same with a HD7970 or a R9 290X using games like Serious Sam 3, DOTA 2 or Left 4 Dead 2.
                  I actually play Dota2 and L4D2 on my 7970M using the latest radeonsi git pulls with no problem. That's even with using PRIME offloading, since I have a MUX-less hybrid laptop.

                  There *is* room for improvement -- these certainly don't run as fast as they do on Windows, at least at the current stage of radeonsi development -- and I'd love to see performance improved upon further, but at this time everything is entirely playable at high settings.

                  Radeonsi/Mesa/Gallium3D works wonders with Wine, as well. I've been re-playing Arkham City (since they stripped out GFWL and released the GOTY edition) through Wine and it's worked pretty much flawlessly.

                  I'm incredibly happy with radeonsi/Mesa right now.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by BO$$ View Post
                    Big corporations are part of FLOSS? Wasn't that the part that you people wanted to avoid? Corporations controlling 99.99% of the code, even if it's open source?
                    Seriously??
                    Just saying... Canonical is a big corporation too.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by duby229 View Post
                      It's a VLIW4 architecture, the rest of them are VLIW5.
                      Still really interesting if there any chance for any improvements for 6950.

                      bridgman, can you comment on this please?

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by _SXX_ View Post
                        Still really interesting if there any chance for any improvements for 6950.

                        bridgman, can you comment on this please?
                        I'm sure HD69xx performance can be brought in line with HD68xx (ie faster rather than slower), but I don't know the reason for the performance delta.

                        What I can say is that AFAIK there aren't any secrets being held back which would cause a performance difference, so presumably it's just a matter of driver/compiler optimization ie a matter of time. It would be interesting to see if the same performance delta exists with the VLIW4 APUs (Trinity and Richland) relative to the VLIW5 Llano.
                        Last edited by bridgman; 10-31-2013, 01:31 AM.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by bridgman View Post
                          AFAIK there aren't any secrets being held back which would cause a performance difference, so presumably it's just a matter of driver/compiler optimization ie a matter of time.
                          Out of a mix of curiosity and ignorance, is this the same case with radeonsi, that we'll just see performance improvements as we get progressive optimizations? Or are there missing bits for RadeonSI that makes it more difficult to improve on performance?

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by dffx View Post
                            I actually play Dota2 and L4D2 on my 7970M using the latest radeonsi git pulls with no problem.
                            Marek just posted patches for UBO support today. Seems like full GL 3.1 support probably isn't far off.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by Weegee View Post
                              And now do the same with a HD7970 or a R9 290X using games like Serious Sam 3, DOTA 2 or Left 4 Dead 2.

                              I think everyone knows that the driver for the 4000 to 6000 series cards is wonderful and that there's no real reason to not use it over Catalyst. The situation for newer cards (and thus for gamers who bought their AMD card after 2011 and want to switch to Linux) is still dire if you don't use Catalyst (and Catalyst is dire itself).

                              I'm so happy that I was able to replace Catalyst with the open source driver on my laptop which runs the latest Mesa git snapshots and 3.12-rc7 right now, but it also has a Mobility Radeon HD5650 - I don't think I would've done that if I had an actual up-to-date GPU.

                              So yeah ... keep up the good work AMD, but please, start focusing on newer GPUs as well. I don't think recommending a 6870 for playing games on Linux sounds that nice, especially if everyone else already shouts "use NVIDIA on Linux only".
                              Really? No reason to use Catalyst and openCL-ID over the FOSS driver? Hardly.

                              Run those two drivers using ANSYS 14, COMSOL 4.6, etc. Then talk.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by dffx View Post
                                Out of a mix of curiosity and ignorance, is this the same case with radeonsi, that we'll just see performance improvements as we get progressive optimizations? Or are there missing bits for RadeonSI that makes it more difficult to improve on performance?
                                Also, according to Anandtech, Hawaii (and presumably Bonaire) include a much improved hardware PM abilities compared to previous architectures. Is the OSS driver able to take advantage of that? Or is it treating them the same as the previous GCN 1.0 architecture cards?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X