Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The First DRM Pull Request For Linux 2.6.35 Kernel

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by bridgman View Post
    I'm having a tough time reconciling the conflicting views of "AMD is evil for dropping support for older GPUs from fglrx" and "AMD is misguided for having its devs work on older chips in the open source drivers", though...
    Heh... It'd be no different with the Windows or MacOS world, I'm afraid...

    As for my take on things, I don't think you're evil at all for dropping the older GPUs off the list. Can't support the stuff forever and your profits for them have long since past unless someone's using them like they used RagePRO's in server type hardware or an embedded design with a process shrink applied to the design. If there's some nuance to driving the things right (i.e. the AGP to PCI-E bridge that drove some of the last of the AGP specific cards with the more modern chips...) it'd be nice to get help on THAT particular piece from AMD.

    But past that, I'm thinking we're doing decently on supporting the older stuff ourselves with Gallium3D bringing most of the speed back to it all when it gets here.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by RealNC View Post
      This is just taking forever. The open driver sucks, fglrx sucks, so what's the user supposed to do?
      Your options come down to:

      (a) time travel to the future and bring back drivers

      (b) buy hardware that actually has usable drivers

      (c) use an operating system that already has good driver

      (d) hack on the drivers yourself to make them usable

      (e) suck it up, rub some dirt in it, and walk it off

      I'm disappointed with the state of the OSS drivers myself, but let's be honest: it's our fault. Nobody put a gun to my head and told me to buy an HD4770 when I damn well knew that acceptable Linux drivers didn't exist yet and wouldn't be offering full OpenGL 3.2+ support for some time. Those of us who bought higher end ATI video cards without waiting for the drivers to exist first are not very wise people. That we're stuck with hardware we can't make full use of in Linux is our mistake, nobody else's.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by elanthis View Post
        I'm disappointed with the state of the OSS drivers myself, but let's be honest: it's our fault. Nobody put a gun to my head and told me to buy an HD4770 when I damn well knew that acceptable Linux drivers didn't exist yet and wouldn't be offering full OpenGL 3.2+ support for some time. Those of us who bought higher end ATI video cards without waiting for the drivers to exist first are not very wise people. That we're stuck with hardware we can't make full use of in Linux is our mistake, nobody else's.
        I bought it for Windows though. At the time, it was the best card for that price for high-end gaming in Windows.

        Comment


        • #34
          Hmm seems swap and sync patch for ati is not in yet ?

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by RealNC View Post
            I bought it for Windows though. At the time, it was the best card for that price for high-end gaming in Windows.
            Then you're proving ATi's strategy right: Focus performance on the Windows market, the Linux consumer market is irrelevant. By buying the card for its windows performance regardless of its Linux performance, you're indicating that they should continue focusing on Windows performance.

            If Linux performance was really important to you you should've put your money where your mouth is and bought a card with more feature complete Linux drivers, even if it ran worse or hotter than ATi's.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Vash63 View Post
              Then you're proving ATi's strategy right: Focus performance on the Windows market, the Linux consumer market is irrelevant. By buying the card for its windows performance regardless of its Linux performance, you're indicating that they should continue focusing on Windows performance.

              If Linux performance was really important to you you should've put your money where your mouth is and bought a card with more feature complete Linux drivers, even if it ran worse or hotter than ATi's.
              From that angle, should we start requesting performance per Celcius graphs?

              Comment


              • #37
                Sorry, I didn't mean actual temperature of the card. I meant its actual power draw and heat output. Performance per watt is a common measurement for both processors and graphics processors. And one that Nvidia's cheer generation is particularly poor in. The gtx480 draws twice as much power as the Radeon 5870 while only performing marginally better in most cases. Power draw and heat output arte directly related, thus it 'runs hotter.'

                Comment


                • #38
                  s/cheer/current

                  Damn phone auto-correction mixed with this forum's strange lack of editing functions...

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by airlied View Post
                    Did you see any AMD employees working on AGP at all?

                    Most of the AGP patches are from community members who really can work on what they like.

                    Dave.
                    Yes & wide hardware support is a strength of Linux. Lets not be lemmings & follow Windows7 over the cliff.

                    cg

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by cg512 View Post
                      Yes & wide hardware support is a strength of Linux. Lets not be lemmings & follow Windows7 over the cliff.

                      cg
                      A strength of Windows is that it has full featured graphics drivers at launch of graphics card x. In the OSS graphics drivers department this is where Linux is still lacking. I'd personally rather see Linux play catch-up there at the cost of supporting museum-pieces forever.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Delgarde View Post
                        The absence of anything relating to Nouveau isn't necessarily a bad thing - it may indicate that the devs are happy with the kernel layer for the moment, and spending all their time on the userspace code. That's the important part, after all - now that modesetting works pretty well, the biggest issues are things like OpenGL, or accelerated video, all userspace...
                        I haven't seen a nouveau commit in Mesa for a long time.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by Kjella View Post
                          I thought a while I'd managed to figure some of this stuff out myself and chip in but I'm suffering from way too many C++isms and using a good toolkit on top of that. Going to the metal of GPU programming in C was hard.
                          C++ism is actually an advantage, Gallium is object-oriented and even though it's in C, you'll see the pattern there. The only think we miss is C++ templates, besides that we have everything we need.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by monraaf View Post
                            A strength of Windows is that it has full featured graphics drivers at launch of graphics card x. In the OSS graphics drivers department this is where Linux is still lacking. I'd personally rather see Linux play catch-up there at the cost of supporting museum-pieces forever.
                            The bleeding edge are the minority. Its stretching facts a bit to call AGP 'museum piece'. I for one am tired of the fadish nature of the video card scene. Constantly being told to throw away expensive hardware because the latest game needs yet another new latest ultra mega cool version video card gets old real quick..

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by cg512 View Post
                              The bleeding edge are the minority. Its stretching facts a bit to call AGP 'museum piece'. I for one am tired of the fadish nature of the video card scene. Constantly being told to throw away expensive hardware because the latest game needs yet another new latest ultra mega cool version video card gets old real quick..
                              The 'bleeding edge' is where AMD makes it's money. I don't think that people who are still using 10 year old r100/r200 cards are very profitable customers for AMD. So to me it doesn't make sense to invest any AMD time or money in supporting these cards. Closed or open source.

                              As for AGP. It's an aging technology and I think developers have stated it numerous times that it's a pain in the ass to support. IIRC this is mostly because other factors such as the chipset that are a large factor contributing to the (in)stability of AGP cards.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by monraaf View Post
                                The 'bleeding edge' is where AMD makes it's money. I don't think that people who are still using 10 year old r100/r200 cards are very profitable customers for AMD. So to me it doesn't make sense to invest any AMD time or money in supporting these cards. Closed or open source.

                                As for AGP. It's an aging technology and I think developers have stated it numerous times that it's a pain in the ass to support. IIRC this is mostly because other factors such as the chipset that are a large factor contributing to the (in)stability of AGP cards.
                                I don't agree.

                                Part of the COST to you of purchasing your l33t new video adapter card is not just the engineering devoted to create it, but the implicit expectation engineering will be devoted to SUPPORTING it.

                                Companies that develop a reputation for abandoning their past customers lose future customers. I applaud AMD for having the good sense to sensibly apportion support resources to their existing customers.

                                You're obviously not a business person, the notion of 'good will' & reputation is obviously completely lost on you. Gamers are not AMD's only market. They supply huge quantities of chips to OEM's. These companies have an expectation that THEIR customers will remain happy & not come back to haunt them if AMD does not take care to support their chips with drivers.

                                I have no tolerance for people who buy (expensive) hardware in the full knowledge that it does not have essential software (drivers) to enable it's use in a particular OS setting.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X