Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Another Look At The Latest Nouveau Gallium3D Driver

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by BlackStar View Post
    Which confirms what we always knew: there's a huge gap between open-source support in amd and nvidia.

    Even so, reverse engineered 3d drivers with interactive framerates are several kinds of awesome. Too bad that nvidia remains the bad kid in the playground.
    It is not. Sadly.
    I had 9800gt, in urban terror 4.1, fullhd, I had near 130fps.
    Now on 4770 with opensource drivers I get 50 at BEST, normally 40.
    Nvidia on reversed achives 35...

    And I would still be able to use proprietary, but working nvidia driver.
    A question remains though - why noveau developers are not improving amd opensource, but hack nvidia blob. A resource waste if you ask me (but its their choice).

    1.
    Originally posted by 89c51 View Post
    the solution is NOT to buy nvidia graphic cards whenever possible
    2.
    Originally posted by Melcar View Post
    As if people will listen . Most users (especially the new "came from Windows and now use Ubuntu" crowd) simply donīt care for any of this.
    3.
    Originally posted by Remco View Post
    Monitor hotplugging, out of the box experience.

    I would APPLAUSE you all, if you provide me a single answer.
    If I buy amd card, instead of nvidia, how will amd pay more money to opensource drivers? Please reveal me this mechanism.

    I buy amd card, I dont buy nvidia card - where is the increased opensource moneyflow? What do I really pay for?

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
      I would APPLAUSE you all, if you provide me a single answer.
      If I buy amd card, instead of nvidia, how will amd pay more money to opensource drivers? Please reveal me this mechanism.

      I buy amd card, I dont buy nvidia card - where is the increased opensource moneyflow? What do I really pay for?
      You pay AMD, they get more money, they invest more in R&D including Linux. What's hard to understand?

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
        A question remains though - why noveau developers are not improving amd opensource, but hack nvidia blob. A resource waste if you ask me (but its their choice).
        Unpaid developers work on drivers for the hardware they have, and they mostly do it for fun. If you gave a gfx driver developer a PC with a pretty old gfx card and that would be the only PC he would have, you would see a new driver emerging for that card no matter how obsolete piece of crap it is.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
          A question remains though - why noveau developers are not improving amd opensource, but hack nvidia blob. A resource waste if you ask me (but its their choice).
          Basically, there are important distributions out there (RedHat) who want all GPUs to have working support out of the box. Since Nvidia is boycotting this like the plague, they fund developers to reverse-engineer it.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Remco View Post
            Monitor hotplugging, out of the box experience.
            My out-of-the-box-open-source experience is a dead black screen, atleast on Ubuntu since it switched to nouveau (using GT 240).

            Not so much a point against nouveau but ubuntus stupid decisions to automatically use unstable drivers (the nv driver works nice).

            Comment


            • #21
              Drivers made by people other than the hardware maker will never match the official ones, either in quality or speed. Even with hardware documentation available it will take years for development to reach a state of good-enough but by then your hardware is already obsolete.

              If I go and spend some good cash on a brand new geforce / radeon card tomorrow I'll want to get the maximum juice out of the card on that same day. That will never happen with open source drivers.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by zoomblab View Post
                Drivers made by people other than the hardware maker will never match the official ones, either in quality or speed. Even with hardware documentation available it will take years for development to reach a state of good-enough but by then your hardware is already obsolete.

                If I go and spend some good cash on a brand new geforce / radeon card tomorrow I'll want to get the maximum juice out of the card on that same day. That will never happen with open source drivers.
                What you are saying is not completely wrong, but if you follow that logic, you have to stop using Linux altogether, because many drivers are not written by the hardware manufacturers.

                Also, if you use Fedora or Debian, then your argument is hypocritical because these distributions are compiled by GCC and not the Intel compiler, which is much more optimised. If you buy a new i7 tomorrow, then you are right to demand more juice and 100% optimised peformance, but you don't do that, you ignore that and use GCC happily, and you use Linux happily, and you use ext3/4 happily, although there are more optimised closed-source alternatives out there.

                The same goes for Windows, which is compiled using Visual Studio, which is good, but inferior to the Intel compiler.

                I don't see why people are so religious about getting 5% or 10% more performance from a graphics card, unless they happen to be teenager game kiddiez. Most operating systems out there and most drivers are written by people other than the manufacturers, and usually don't deliver 100.00% performance, but somewhere near 90 or 95. And gain some maintainability and stability in the process. Same goes for graphics drivers. If they can match 75% of the performance of the blob (and it looks like they can), and bring all the advantages of open source, then damn right, I will use them.

                If I want 100% optimizerzed performans, I'll buy a console.

                Comment


                • #23
                  same here...

                  monitor black , nouveau 8400gs, nv rocks

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by zoomblab View Post
                    Drivers made by people other than the hardware maker will never match the official ones, either in quality or speed. Even with hardware documentation available it will take years for development to reach a state of good-enough but by then your hardware is already obsolete.
                    We've recently proven that it is possible to match the speed of official drivers. It doesn't matter who develops the OSS drivers if a hardware manufacturer at least provides technical support and if there is enough manpower.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Remco View Post
                      You pay AMD, they get more money, they invest more in R&D including Linux. What's hard to understand?
                      It is hard to understand how they figure out Im using it (and bought it) only due to opensource driver and I want my money going in direction "opensource". But no such way, up to this moment, exists. I pay AMD, yes. They develop windows drivers. Not opensource. Where is my money going?


                      Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
                      Basically, there are important distributions out there (RedHat) who want all GPUs to have working support out of the box. Since Nvidia is boycotting this like the plague, they fund developers to reverse-engineer it.
                      I wonder why RH does this. They are no way "fun" or "hobby", they are making money with opensource solutions driving opensource forward. If they need tesla in corporate there is so much research to be done on foreign(as in not manufactured by them) hardware, same as everything else.

                      Last time I installed Linux Mint on my GF parents PC it refused to boot due to KMS in NV driver, which I disabled for VESA and all went fine(including installing proprietary for 8300 IGP, which is more than enough to run almost all titles).

                      So why do they put money there, it wont be functional and it wont be complete. For fun?

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by marek View Post
                        We've recently proven that it is possible to match the speed of official drivers. It doesn't matter who develops the OSS drivers if a hardware manufacturer at least provides technical support and if there is enough manpower.
                        And the manufacturer STANDS behind this. Provides access to hardware simulation, even via NDA. Checks for actual real world usage and demand (&tendencies). Provides tight work with hardware designers themself. Prints in large letters that this OS is official supported - on the box. Four developers is GREAT. Really. But it is by far not enough for efficient use of hardware.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
                          Basically, there are important distributions out there (RedHat) who want all GPUs to have working support out of the box. Since Nvidia is boycotting this like the plague, they fund developers to reverse-engineer it.
                          I don't think nVidia is providing ANY funding OR docs to devs at all, not even under NDA AFAIK...so you must mean Red Hat most likely funds the nouveau devs.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
                            It is hard to understand how they figure out Im using it (and bought it) only due to opensource driver and I want my money going in direction "opensource". But no such way, up to this moment, exists. I pay AMD, yes. They develop windows drivers. Not opensource. Where is my money going?
                            Your money is going into lawyers who are clearing hardware documentation for release. And your money is going into developers who are writing driver code. Say AMD spends 0.1% of their budget on open source Linux drivers. That 0.1% is going to grow in absolute terms when AMD earns more money. They probably don't know how exactly how many customers are using their cards with an open driver, but they must have estimates.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
                              And the manufacturer STANDS behind this.
                              I think so, depending on exactly what you mean by this.

                              Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
                              Provides access to hardware simulation, even via NDA.
                              Yep, that's how we got the r600 3D driver working in the first place. The work was done on a hardware simulation of what became the HD4770 (rv740), before the product was even released.

                              Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
                              Checks for actual real world usage and demand (&tendencies).
                              Yep, unless you mean going out and asking every individual user which OSes and drivers they are running. The only reliable way to do that is with a mandatory reporting mechanism that sends user information back to AMD for all OSes, which would be extremely unpopular.

                              Voluntary reporting is not particularly useful since you have no way to determine whether the group that *did* respond is representative of the entire user base, or whether they have "self-selected" based on particular interests or preferences.

                              Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
                              Provides tight work with hardware designers themself.
                              Yep. If we didn't do that the whole effort would move a lot more slowly.

                              Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
                              Prints in large letters that this OS is official supported - on the box.
                              We don't choose which OSes the manufacturers choose to support, and right now most (all ?) board mfgs choose to only support some or all of the Windows OSes. Hopefully this will change with time.

                              Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
                              Four developers is GREAT. Really. But it is by far not enough for efficient use of hardware.
                              Perhaps, but there's also the proprietary driver which shares code across multiple OSes in order to provide efficient use of the hardware, at least on the 3D side.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                When I respond to posts like this I'm never sure how much to repeat from previous posts, but I think one thing is worth repeating.

                                We are neither claiming to nor attempting to provide enough development resources to fully implement the open source drivers ourselves. That was not the plan in the past, is not the plan today, and I don't expect it to be the plan in the future.

                                We *are*, however, trying to make sure that we get enough information, support and sample code out to the driver development community to let the community make good use of the hardware (other than specific blocks like UVD, which we said up front would probably not be exposed), and I believe we are doing that today.

                                In some cases that means we write the initial driver code for new hardware enablement; in others we provide documentation. Over time, we try to provide both (typically working code first, then documentation later, since we need to write the code in order to know what to put in the documentation).

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X