Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Unigine Heaven Update Coming With OpenGL Tessellation

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by jrch2k8 View Post
    direct2d actually is close to work at least at half speed of foss 2d current accel(LOL)
    Err? Direct2D is only available under Vista SP2 and Windows7 and there is no foss driver for those. Under Windows AMD drivers have/had? only problems with GDI accel. not with Direct2D accel.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Stebs View Post
      Err? Direct2D is only available under Vista SP2 and Windows7 and there is no foss driver for those. Under Windows AMD drivers have/had? only problems with GDI accel. not with Direct2D accel.
      no, since fglrx it never founded a way to properly accel 2d since ever, they are trying to use opencl/stream (aka gpgpu acceleration) to make 2d faster like they are doing in the windows drivers, they are just maintaining the same name as windows driver aka direct2d (ovbiously is not exactly the same as the direct2d dx11 api, they are just taking the same concept but for xorg api).

      i agree that the catalyst for windows is quite decent, but we are talking about fglrx here and linux

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by bridgman View Post
        I'm sure asking will only make things worse, but exactly what do you feel "ATI/AMD PROMISED to linuxers some months ago" and how was that promise made ?

        For the last three years I have been hearing about promises we allegedly made, but I don't think I have found a single case where that was actually true.
        Maybe not promise but more advertise. AMD/ATI say we support OpenGL but now we have an Company that say the OPenGL Implementation from AMD/ATI is buggy and not usable ( There are some more companies that say that ).

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Nille View Post
          Maybe not promise but more advertise. AMD/ATI say we support OpenGL but now we have an Company that say the OPenGL Implementation from AMD/ATI is buggy and not usable ( There are some more companies that say that ).
          To be fair, it was more phoronix saying that than anyone else. Unigine did have some issues with AMD's drivers at one point, but those issues were solved for quite some time before the demo release.
          Also, AMD's drivers are typically best used when you stick to the opengl spec as strictly as possible, which many people don't do (even I've been caught out by it sometimes). AMD isn't always to blame; sometimes the developers need to fix their code instead.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
            "really it surprised you that fglrx is tessalation bugged?"

            most of the customers 99% use DX11 for that and no DX11 is not bugged in the catalyst.

            i don't care about a benchmark or demo like unigin!

            i care about real apps like "wine" !

            and wine don't support dx11/OpenGL4 right now!
            yeah, well remember catalyst receive 99% of the love from amd, fglrx on the other side is heavily bugged to begin with, and 1 thing have fglrx proved in all this years, if it works at least decently on windows already on fglrx will take a hell of releases to even get close. so if direct2d follow the same path that 2d accel, xvba, stream/opencl, wine, etc have follow, well the first releases woud be havoc if you activate "direct2d" until several releases later

            well ok unigine demos for now are only eyecandy i give you that, but remember some games from that engine are coming for linux too, so eventually would be peachy to have full support for that engine.

            well wine working fine with fglrx is not going to happen any time soon, even the foss drivers are more compliant now than fglrx(ok slower, but the stuff render as it should or at least load the apps without sigsegv's, r700 still miss gl 2.1 support for now)

            well remember opengl4 is not a different library or something else, opengl unlike directx doesnt need to have different library or api every version. aka

            opengl4 use a lot if not most of opengl 3.3 and opengl2.1 and opengl 2.0 and ok you get the point.

            so opengl4 is only a subset of additional functions that call a certain number of registries supported only in a specific set of hardware, in fact you can run tessalation on a non evergreen hardware for example having an opencl fallback (ok wouldnt be that cool as the supported hardware but it can improve the image quality in previous generation if you wanna bother in doing it). so even if you claim wine doesnt support opengl4(wich is only a limited set of function inside the gl library btw) , wine support gl3.3, so ok you miss the goodies of evergreen and some new shaders functions in glsl, but you are using most the gl implementation in fglrx wich is proved again and again to be buggy not only in wine.

            so even if you had wine+gl4 support today probably all your games would be equally bugged as they are today

            dunno i would just prefered that fglrx team forget for a time gl4 and focus on debug the most of their current libgl implementation, so they can later focus on get a superb gl4 now with a working 3d system, but well

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by jrch2k8 View Post
              no, since fglrx it never founded a way to properly accel 2d since ever, they are trying to use opencl/stream (aka gpgpu acceleration) to make 2d faster like they are doing in the windows drivers, they are just maintaining the same name as windows driver aka direct2d (ovbiously is not exactly the same as the direct2d dx11 api, they are just taking the same concept but for xorg api).

              i agree that the catalyst for windows is quite decent, but we are talking about fglrx here and linux

              and where did you get this information?

              besides. that new 2d system is still very beta - so no surprise it is slow.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by jrch2k8 View Post
                yeah, well remember catalyst receive 99% of the love from amd, fglrx on the other side is heavily bugged to begin with, and 1 thing have fglrx proved in all this years, if it works at least decently on windows already on fglrx will take a hell of releases to even get close. so if direct2d follow the same path that 2d accel, xvba, stream/opencl, wine, etc have follow, well the first releases woud be havoc if you activate "direct2d" until several releases later

                well ok unigine demos for now are only eyecandy i give you that, but remember some games from that engine are coming for linux too, so eventually would be peachy to have full support for that engine.

                well wine working fine with fglrx is not going to happen any time soon, even the foss drivers are more compliant now than fglrx(ok slower, but the stuff render as it should or at least load the apps without sigsegv's, r700 still miss gl 2.1 support for now)

                well remember opengl4 is not a different library or something else, opengl unlike directx doesnt need to have different library or api every version. aka

                opengl4 use a lot if not most of opengl 3.3 and opengl2.1 and opengl 2.0 and ok you get the point.

                so opengl4 is only a subset of additional functions that call a certain number of registries supported only in a specific set of hardware, in fact you can run tessalation on a non evergreen hardware for example having an opencl fallback (ok wouldnt be that cool as the supported hardware but it can improve the image quality in previous generation if you wanna bother in doing it). so even if you claim wine doesnt support opengl4(wich is only a limited set of function inside the gl library btw) , wine support gl3.3, so ok you miss the goodies of evergreen and some new shaders functions in glsl, but you are using most the gl implementation in fglrx wich is proved again and again to be buggy not only in wine.

                so even if you had wine+gl4 support today probably all your games would be equally bugged as they are today

                dunno i would just prefered that fglrx team forget for a time gl4 and focus on debug the most of their current libgl implementation, so they can later focus on get a superb gl4 now with a working 3d system, but well
                This seems like a good time to remind that the OpenGL/OpenCL stack in the Linux Catalyst driver (aka fglrx) is the *same* as the one in the Windows Catalyst driver. The OS-specific glue is different, of course, but the core code (>95%) is common - that's the main reason binary drivers exist in the first place. If you want totally different development priorities for Linux and Windows then you really should be looking at the open source drivers - binary drivers from all vendors use common code across multiple OSes so the development priorities are essentially locked together as well.

                What you call "Direct2D" acceleration (it's not Direct2D by the way) has never been announced or discussed; you only know about it at all because someone violated their NDA and leaked info about code which was still in development. Complaining about the performance of something that is still under development seems misplaced at best.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by bridgman View Post
                  This seems like a good time to remind that the OpenGL/OpenCL stack in the Linux Catalyst driver (aka fglrx) is the *same* as the one in the Windows Catalyst driver.
                  No one say that OpenGL is better under Windowns And under Windows the most Apps use D3D.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    I believe jrch2k8 was - the post I was responding to seemed to imply a big difference in quality between a feature in fglrx and the same feature (OpenGL 4 in this case) on Windows :

                    Originally posted by jrch2k8 View Post
                    yeah, well remember catalyst receive 99% of the love from amd, fglrx on the other side is heavily bugged to begin with, and 1 thing have fglrx proved in all this years, if it works at least decently on windows already on fglrx will take a hell of releases to even get close.
                    Are you saying the post was really about DX11 vs OpenGL rather than the Windows and fglrx implementations of OpenGL ?

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      well, has someone tried unigine on windows with opengl on ati?
                      If yes, and it works, we know that unigine is bullshitting around.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by energyman View Post
                        well, has someone tried unigine on windows with opengl on ati?
                        If yes, and it works, we know that unigine is bullshitting around.

                        It worked fine last time I tried, which was with Catalyst 10.3 I believe.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by jrch2k8 View Post
                          yeah, well remember catalyst receive 99% of the love from amd, fglrx on the other side is heavily bugged to begin with, and 1 thing have fglrx proved in all this years, if it works at least decently on windows already on fglrx will take a hell of releases to even get close. so if direct2d follow the same path that 2d accel, xvba, stream/opencl, wine, etc have follow, well the first releases woud be havoc if you activate "direct2d" until several releases later

                          well ok unigine demos for now are only eyecandy i give you that, but remember some games from that engine are coming for linux too, so eventually would be peachy to have full support for that engine.

                          well wine working fine with fglrx is not going to happen any time soon, even the foss drivers are more compliant now than fglrx(ok slower, but the stuff render as it should or at least load the apps without sigsegv's, r700 still miss gl 2.1 support for now)

                          well remember opengl4 is not a different library or something else, opengl unlike directx doesnt need to have different library or api every version. aka

                          opengl4 use a lot if not most of opengl 3.3 and opengl2.1 and opengl 2.0 and ok you get the point.

                          so opengl4 is only a subset of additional functions that call a certain number of registries supported only in a specific set of hardware, in fact you can run tessalation on a non evergreen hardware for example having an opencl fallback (ok wouldnt be that cool as the supported hardware but it can improve the image quality in previous generation if you wanna bother in doing it). so even if you claim wine doesnt support opengl4(wich is only a limited set of function inside the gl library btw) , wine support gl3.3, so ok you miss the goodies of evergreen and some new shaders functions in glsl, but you are using most the gl implementation in fglrx wich is proved again and again to be buggy not only in wine.

                          so even if you had wine+gl4 support today probably all your games would be equally bugged as they are today

                          dunno i would just prefered that fglrx team forget for a time gl4 and focus on debug the most of their current libgl implementation, so they can later focus on get a superb gl4 now with a working 3d system, but well
                          I have to ask you this. Do you own an ATI card? Or are you just a nvidia fand bashing ATI?

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Melcar View Post
                            It worked fine last time I tried, which was with Catalyst 10.3 I believe.
                            well, then we have it:

                            unigine is talking bullshit. Who is surprised?

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by energyman View Post
                              well, then we have it:

                              unigine is talking bullshit. Who is surprised?
                              Not unigine - I've never actually seen any official word from them. Well I'll correct that; someone did ask (I'll have to dig back a while to find a link) and unigine replied that it was not amd's drivers holding things up.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Here we go, post #18:

                                http://www.phoronix.com/forums/showt...t=22423&page=2

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X