Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

ATI R600/700 OSS 3D Driver Reaches Gears Milestone

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

  • As I've understood, after the geometric corruption issue gets fixed, it'll be a major bug hunting time so yeah, things will slowly get sorted, probably. :3

    Comment


    • Awesome

      Originally posted by suokko View Post
      Software rendering is direct too. Old guides saying to look if glxinfo says direct or no direct rendering are all outdated.
      I wonder if this is referring to a portion of a guide I helped author? - https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Ra...tic%20Commands

      The command is aimed at r600/700 owners using Ubuntu 8.10. They have to build their own DRM for EXA support so I suggested they double-check that it loaded properly. I'm sorry if that confused people who thought it had significance to 3D acceleration/hardware support.

      On another note: I fired up my Jaunty install, grabbed agd5f's drm and mesa git, and I now have some basic 3D. zsnes is actually playable in a decent-sized window now. YOU GUYS ROCK! (in a Dilbert-like way)

      Success:
      Code:
      OpenGL vendor string: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
      OpenGL renderer string: Mesa DRI R600 (RV710 9540) 20090101  TCL
      OpenGL version string: 1.4 Mesa 7.6-devel

      Comment


      • The r6xx-r7xx-support branch of DRM is mostly dead and that guide is obsolete. Just tell them to use kernel 2.6.30 or newer if they want EXA/Sv.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by nanonyme View Post
          The r6xx-r7xx-support branch of DRM is mostly dead and that guide is obsolete. Just tell them to use kernel 2.6.30 or newer if they want EXA/Sv.
          I think I'm going to do what I did with my OSS4 guide and just make it a Jaunty affair. Thank you for inspiration, good sir.

          Comment


          • I obviously meant Xv. And yes, now I understand the comment by bridgman "isn't it annoying when someone quotes your post before you have a chance to fix the typos" or something along the lines...

            Comment


            • According to zrusin :
              zack's blog.

              And based on the qt dev blog, qt 4.5 has an experimental opengl back-end. According to the vmware guru, opengl brings lot's of hope to boost most of day to day performances. Performances can vary by a factor of 20.
              My question is : do some people test qt opengl back-end ?
              At home in a gnome environment, running okular with the option -graphicssystem=opengl completely screwed up the display, I needed to force the repaint of the gnome panels to get rid of all the stains.
              Did any body try running any qt/kde app using the opengl back-end ?

              Comment


              • Originally posted by lucky_ View Post
                According to zrusin :
                zack's blog.

                And based on the qt dev blog, qt 4.5 has an experimental opengl back-end. According to the vmware guru, opengl brings lot's of hope to boost most of day to day performances. Performances can vary by a factor of 20.
                My question is : do some people test qt opengl back-end ?
                At home in a gnome environment, running okular with the option -graphicssystem=opengl completely screwed up the display, I needed to force the repaint of the gnome panels to get rid of all the stains.
                Did any body try running any qt/kde app using the opengl back-end ?
                Meh, don't get fooled by the market speech. Most of the new innovations starting from moving from typewriters to computers have actually reduced day to day performance. Just as to why an opensource programmer is using market speech is beyond me though, maybe they're afraid no one will use their product.

                Comment


                • Well technically, I trust M. Ruzin for being honest on the numbers. There is no mystery that qt4 is kinda slow on a default set up.
                  As stated in the blog even the default x11/render is slower than the pure software raster engine provided by QT.
                  The lack of a proper QT benchmark is somehow one reason why people don't get the point of dumping X11/render path for opengl.
                  Last edited by lucky_; 17 August 2009, 04:25 AM.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by lucky_ View Post
                    Weel technically, I trust M. Ruzin for being honest on the numbers. There is no mystery that qt4 is kinda slow on a default set up.
                    This might also be due to bad design, not just how it's being rendered... Imo the problem is why has QT4 grown to be a terrible bloaty piece of software that actually needs OpenGL and GPU to work fluidly. "While OpenGL engine should in general never fallback, that is not the case for X11 and there are fallbacks" also sounds like a wrong assumption. Of course the OpenGL engine will fallback to software in some cases. If he had at least said it fallbacks less often, it'd be pseudo-believable.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by nanonyme View Post
                      This might also be due to bad design, not just how it's being rendered... Imo the problem is why has QT4 grown to be a terrible bloaty piece of software that actually needs OpenGL and GPU to work fluidly. "While OpenGL engine should in general never fallback, that is not the case for X11 and there are fallbacks" also sounds like a wrong assumption. Of course the OpenGL engine will fallback to software in some cases. If he had at least said it fallbacks less often, it'd be pseudo-believable.
                      I thinks he says, even though opengl fallback from hardware to software, you still have an opengl engine, whether it's running on you cpu or your gpu doesn't really matter (it does performance wise), but a statted somewhere, a software rendered opengl backend would be even faster than X11/xrender.
                      He's point is whatever you try to run, you always end up running things on the cpu, hence you better go with opengl since it's the one with the best overall performance. Opengl is best when hardware rendered and opengl is fast as well when software rendered.

                      Well maybe it's just marketing crap, but what would be the point of advertising qt, on his own blog. He'sn ot responsible for sales at nokia.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X