AMDGPU-PRO vs. RadeonSI/RADV & NVIDIA's Linux Drivers To End 2016

[Michael]

what is the low profile visiontek card at the top left? is it the hd 7750?

Yes: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...stery-Box-GPUs

[schmidtbag]

wrong answer

Care to provide sources before making such claims? Most of what you mentioned didn't disagree with my post. Anyway, if amdgpu (non-pro) involves userland and closed-source software then what's the point of amdgpu-pro?
The following sources do not state there is any closed-source code is the non-pro amdgpu driver:

https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/AMDGPU

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMDGPU

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/AMDGPU

According to the Arch wiki, only amdgpu-pro is specificially mentioned to be open+closed+userland.

[geearf]

Care to provide sources before making such claims? If amdgpu (non-pro) involves userland and closed-source software then what's the point of amdgpu-pro?
The following sources do not state there is any closed-source code is the non-pro amdgpu driver:

https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/AMDGPU

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMDGPU

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/AMDGPU

According to the Arch wiki, only amdgpu-pro is specificially mentioned to be open+closed+userland.
To my recollection, Phoronix has also distinguished that only amdgpu-pro uses closed software too.

The quote you have doesn't say that the FOSS driver use closed-source software.
amdgpu is just the kernel driver, which is upstreamed, so upstream would not take proprietary parts

[schmidtbag]

The quote you have doesn't say that the FOSS driver use closed-source software.
amdgpu is just the kernel driver, which is upstreamed, so upstream would not take proprietary parts

Right, because if it used closed-source software then it wouldn't be FOSS (or as you said, upstreamed), so why would I say that otherwise? What you said is pretty much what I said. That's what I'm confused about; I don't see where I'm wrong.

[haagch]

What the heck happened with the Bioshock test?

https://openbenchmarking.org/prospect/1612289-TA-GRAPHICSD45/76c1d560ee4669f7cd81b1b56c6d92a067c5594f

I am to believe that the Radeon HD 7750 is faster than the GeForce GTX 1050 Ti? And the Radeon HD 5830 supposedly renders this game with 70 fps on ultra while the GeForce GTX 680 only manages 53 fps?

Did it render correctly?

[dungeon]

I am to believe that the Radeon HD 7750 is faster than the GeForce GTX 1050 Ti?

Why not, Bioshock has nvidia driver threaded variable enabled... it is quite possible that break with some nvidia driver versions here and there or for specific hardware

Since it is optional and non default i mean, it has all rights reserved to break anytime

[orome]

Care to provide sources before making such claims? Most of what you mentioned didn't disagree with my post. Anyway, if amdgpu (non-pro) involves userland and closed-source software then what's the point of amdgpu-pro?
The following sources do not state there is any closed-source code is the non-pro amdgpu driver:

https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/AMDGPU

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMDGPU

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/AMDGPU

According to the Arch wiki, only amdgpu-pro is specificially mentioned to be open+closed+userland.

misquoting and pasting generic urls won't help you. I never said that FOSS driver includes closed components.
your original answer is still wrong. The difference between FOSS and PRO is not

Short answer - radeon is open source and strictly kernel level, amdgpu-pro is partially closed source and does some stuff at user level.

FOSS stack is Mesa + llvm + libdrm + radeon.ko/amdgpu.ko
PRO stack is AMD-closed-GL + patched-amdgpu.ko

both include kernel and uspace components. The reason to have AMD-closed-GL is to support features needed by CAD tools that will never be implemented in Mesa.

[Marc Driftmeyer]

misquoting and pasting generic urls won't help you. I never said that FOSS driver includes closed components.
your original answer is still wrong. The difference between FOSS and PRO is not


FOSS stack is Mesa + llvm + libdrm + radeon.ko/amdgpu.ko
PRO stack is AMD-closed-GL + patched-amdgpu.ko

both include kernel and uspace components. The reason to have AMD-closed-GL is to support features needed by CAD tools that will never be implemented in Mesa.

And if AMD would provide a Pro set for Debian I wouldn't give to craps about Mesa because I'd have an OpenCL stack that works; and that is money to my bottom line. With libclc being a broken OpenCL that Mesa OpenCL profile relies on my RX 480 8GB is peeing in the wind since I have absolutely ZERO interest rebuilding my workstation to run Ubuntu.

[darkbasic]

You can use PRO's OpenCL blob with the FOSS driver. It works with every distro, it is just a bit tricky without official packages.

[bug77]

Hm, disregarding Bioshock, only Fury can occasionally match my 1060, so I must have made the right purchase. But it's a bit strange, because on Windows RX480 seems to be getting ever closer to the GTX 1060. (I believe someone made a comparison between drivers at launch and drivers from November or so.)