Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

RadeonHD useless?

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

  • #11
    We're just starting to work on 6xx 3d engine support now (that includes the 780). Shouldn't be too long, but there is a fair amount of work to be done.

    Comment


    • #12
      So for example, if the RadeonHD and Radeon driver will both support the X1200, and both use the same 3D code, then what would be the benefit of using one of them over the other? I always imagined RadeonHD would have new 3D code.

      Comment


      • #13
        Originally posted by bridgman View Post
        We're just starting to work on 6xx 3d engine support now (that includes the 780). Shouldn't be too long, but there is a fair amount of work to be done.
        Great, thanks for the comment. I'm looking forward to you're guys work.

        Comment


        • #14
          I always imagined RadeonHD would have new 3D code.
          Radeonhd and radeon are X drivers, which don't really have much to do with 3D other than initializing the drm and providing window information. The 3d code is primarily in the mesa and drm components. Remember that 3D support for 5xx was only added over the last few months, and work is starting on 6xx right now, so in a sense it's all "new code" anyways.
          Last edited by bridgman; 06-03-2008, 07:15 PM.

          Comment


          • #15
            Originally posted by bridgman View Post
            Radeonhd and radeon are X drivers, which don't really have much to do with 3D other than initializing the drm and providing window information. The 3d code is primarily in the mesa and drm components. Remember that 3D support for 5xx was only added over the last few months, and work is starting on 6xx right now, so in a sense it's all "new code" anyways.
            so, where exactlly is the difference? what could make one or the other better?
            i think the subject is getting confusing

            [edit]
            i read the article on AtomBIOS, and i have to clarify my question:
            i meant: "what will be the difference?"
            Last edited by Vighy; 06-06-2008, 07:44 AM.

            Comment


            • #16
              The difference is that radeon will give support to new cards faster than radeonhd, but radeonhd might be more stable since it directly accesses the hardware, also radeonhd might give you a few extra glxgears frames once 3d stabilizes (but compared to the thousands that are already there, it's nothing )

              Comment


              • #17
                The difference is that radeon will give support to new cards faster than radeonhd, but radeonhd might be more stable since it directly accesses the hardware, also radeonhd might give you a few extra glxgears frames once 3d stabilizes (but compared to the thousands that are already there, it's nothing )
                Uhm.. So just that I get that right, do you mean "directly accesses the hardware" like NOT using AtomBIOS? (i.e. using the hardware registers)
                I always thought radeonHD was using AtomBIOS so this is a bit confusing for me at the moment, could you please clarify that for me?

                Comment


                • #18
                  Radeon uses AtomBIOS, RadeonHD tries to avoid it.

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Yes, radeonhd uses the hardware registers most of the time, and it has minimal use of atombios

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      A lot of this information makes me curious about how long it would take to develop a driver. I'm curious as to how hardware is released with drivers in parallel. This would mean that future products must already be produced somehow and drivers tested before release. I can't see any other way how?

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X