Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13

Thread: Intel Linux Now Supports AMD_performance_monitor

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,186

    Default Intel Linux Now Supports AMD_performance_monitor

    Phoronix: Intel Linux Now Supports AMD_performance_monitor

    Intel's OpenGL Mesa driver has added support for the AMD_performance_monitor extension to expose more graphics system performance characteristics...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTUyMjQ

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    107

    Default

    At the rate Intel is improving their drivers, I wouldn't be surprised at all to see OpenGL 4.1-4.2 in the next Mesa release. Definitely my go-to development box graphics solution - just wish their hardware was a bit (lot) more powerful for gaming.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    876

    Default

    I want one good extension supported by all drivers, not many overlapping extensions randomly supported by drivers - which is one of valid bad sides of open source.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    461

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mark45 View Post
    I want one good extension supported by all drivers, not many overlapping extensions randomly supported by drivers - which is one of valid bad sides of open source.
    No, it's a valid down side of extensions (to protocols, etc.), not open source (software, etc.). AMD and nVidia's drivers have plenty of extensions which may or may not be used by Intel's driver (or the nouveau/radeon mesa drivers), and the inverse and opposite is also true.

    The criticism applies equally to any software which implements protocols that have extensions (browsers, for example), not just open source software. It may be more common in non-proprietary standards which allow extensions, like CSS, XML/HTML, and OpenGL, (which also happen to have open source implementations) but it's not exclusive to them.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    876

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nobu View Post
    No, it's a valid down side of extensions (to protocols, etc.), not open source (software, etc.). AMD and nVidia's drivers have plenty of extensions which may or may not be used by Intel's driver (or the nouveau/radeon mesa drivers), and the inverse and opposite is also true.

    The criticism applies equally to any software which implements protocols that have extensions (browsers, for example), not just open source software. It may be more common in non-proprietary standards which allow extensions, like CSS, XML/HTML, and OpenGL, (which also happen to have open source implementations) but it's not exclusive to them.
    No, it's also open source, the gazillion of distros available most of which are shitty and implement, exclude and rediscover the wheel whenever they like is an obvious example.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    461

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mark45 View Post
    No, it's also open source, the gazillion of distros available most of which are shitty and implement, exclude and rediscover the wheel whenever they like is an obvious example.
    And nVidia and AMD's drivers are closed source. Windows, Mac OSX, etc. are also rediscovering the wheel whenever they like. I fail to see how this is only an issue with open source...oh wait, your problem is with the fact that it is open source software, not the fact that the extensions overlap or are randomly supported. Excuse me....

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    705

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mark45 View Post
    No, it's also open source, the gazillion of distros available most of which are shitty and implement, exclude and rediscover the wheel whenever they like is an obvious example.
    Jumping from protocols to whole distributions of software? Most sure way to label yourself as troll.

    And for Your information:

    Intel/AMD/nouveau FLOSS teams are more ready to addopt competitors extensions then their proprietary counterparts. Look up MESA and VDPAU and r600g. Look up AMD_performance_monitor, look up...

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    705

    Default

    przemoli@greenhouse:~$ glxinfo | grep OpenGL
    OpenGL vendor string: X.Org
    OpenGL renderer string: Gallium 0.4 on AMD REDWOOD
    OpenGL core profile version string: 3.1 (Core Profile) Mesa 10.1.0-devel (git-21ae513 saucy-oibaf-ppa)
    OpenGL core profile shading language version string: 1.40
    OpenGL core profile context flags: (none)
    OpenGL core profile extensions:
    OpenGL version string: 3.0 Mesa 10.1.0-devel (git-21ae513 saucy-oibaf-ppa)
    OpenGL shading language version string: 1.30
    OpenGL context flags: (none)
    OpenGL extensions:
    przemoli@greenhouse:~$ glxinfo | grep AMD_performance_monitor
    przemoli@greenhouse:~$

    GJ Intel!

    AMD, when can we see such implementation? (Docs are out for r600g gens?)

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    MA, USA
    Posts
    1,401

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by przemoli View Post
    Jumping from protocols to whole distributions of software? Most sure way to label yourself as troll.

    And for Your information:

    Intel/AMD/nouveau FLOSS teams are more ready to addopt competitors extensions then their proprietary counterparts. Look up MESA and VDPAU and r600g. Look up AMD_performance_monitor, look up...
    I wouldn't really consider that trolling, he was using that as an example stating open source software in general is full people who just do things their own way just because they can, which results in fragmentation. This is absolutely true, but, it doesn't apply to all projects, and I don't feel like the mesa is one of them. Everything they're doing is organized and for the good of everyone, including their own competitors. Intel might be working on different things than AMD but at some point, they'll probably both have the features at the same time.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    705

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schmidtbag View Post
    I wouldn't really consider that trolling, he was using that as an example stating open source software in general is full people who just do things their own way just because they can, which results in fragmentation. This is absolutely true, but, it doesn't apply to all projects, and I don't feel like the mesa is one of them. Everything they're doing is organized and for the good of everyone, including their own competitors. Intel might be working on different things than AMD but at some point, they'll probably both have the features at the same time.
    Point of using parallels, is that both compared things share similarities.

    Here only FLOSS is shared...


    3D graphic industry is FULL of people who like to DO IT YOUR OWN WAY. Both MS and ARB are means to decide what should be picked up by everybody after single-vendor implementation proved its usefullness.

    For that matter good performance measuring extension will be highly implementation dependednt. Different GPU architecture are after all DIFFERENT.


    And last but not least. Remind me:

    How competitor team embrancing same solution help fragment the world?

    Look at Windows/proprietary side of equation. Did he provided us with shiny example of measurement extensions beeing implemented by big 3?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •