NVIDIA Releases Linux Graphics Debugger 2.0

[phoronix]

Phoronix: NVIDIA Releases Linux Graphics Debugger 2.0

NVIDIA has released a major new version of their Linux Graphics Debugger for helping game developers and others wishing to optimize OpenGL 4.x workloads on a variety of Linux distributions...

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=NVIDIA-Linux-Gfx-Debugger-2.0

[janisozaur]

Is GLVND supported now? Previously the graphics debugger failed to load because GLVND shim was not recognised as NVIDIA library and debugger refused loading.

[oooverclocker]

They really seem to try competing with the community plus AMD plus parts of the computer industry which are all potentially able to contribute to AMDs GPUOpen- projects.

I have to say that I really expected them to open source their software as well after AMD. And I find it really daring trying to do this all on their own while they earn pretty much nothing selling software but just hardware. I'm really interested in how this will work, especially when the GPUOpen- Approaches usually work in general for any GPU for free while one may expect issues with other than Nvidia hardware with the GameWorks- Suite.

[bug77]

They really seem to try competing with the community plus AMD plus parts of the computer industry which are all potentially able to contribute to AMDs GPUOpen- projects.

I have to say that I really expected them to open source their software as well after AMD. And I find it really daring trying to do this all on their own while they earn pretty much nothing selling software but just hardware. I'm really interested in how this will work, especially when the GPUOpen- Approaches usually work in general for any GPU for free while one may expect issues with other than Nvidia hardware with the GameWorks- Suite.

I think you got this backwards. First, hardware without software is just an expensive paperweight, so in a sense, Nvidia is actually selling software. Second, Nvidia is making money, AMD isn't. Until AMD's initiative proves itself, there's not much incentive for Nvidia join the fray.
And another aspect people tend to forget: Nvidia invested heavily into building a driver in a way that allowed reuse on several platforms and developed shims for several platforms. That included Linux at a time when drivers on Linux where going nowhere. Times may be changing, but you simply do not throw that effort out the window without a (very) good reason.

[starshipeleven]

I think you got this backwards. First, hardware without software is just an expensive paperweight, so in a sense, Nvidia is actually selling software. Second, Nvidia is making money, AMD isn't. Until AMD's initiative proves itself, there's not much incentive for Nvidia join the fray.
And another aspect people tend to forget: Nvidia invested heavily into building a driver in a way that allowed reuse on several platforms and developed shims for several platforms. That included Linux at a time when drivers on Linux where going nowhere. Times may be changing, but you simply do not throw that effort out the window without a (very) good reason.

Stop making so much sense, this is a pro-AMD forum, it does not matter if arguments are complete bullshit, they must be pro-AMD.

/sarcasm

[oooverclocker]

I could imagine a Vulkan, OpenCL, etc.- supporting GPU pretty easily that keeps all that it takes to expose these interfaces on the circuit board or memory chip. So no - hardware manufacturers don't sell software at all as even drivers aren't theoretically necessary. They just provide them because it's an easy way to tell the software how to use their hardware without exposing all secrets to everyone and it would be more difficult and static to save this software in memory chips on the PCB or even building it directly in the circuit so that there wouldn't be software at all.

Everything besides drivers is just a bonus for lazy developers as it's absolutely not part of a hardware manufacturer's stuff to develop their programs for them. If you want perfection you usually are even more interested in the source code to implement it the way it suits your program or game without redundancies or decreasing the performance rather than just involving a whole different project without knowing its code which is also shipping with a big uncertainty and of course ruining your reputation and the reputation of your game looking very weak and unprofessional when you admit that you had to use GameWorks etc.

[Passso]

Everything besides drivers is just a bonus for lazy developers as it's absolutely not part of a hardware manufacturer's stuff to develop their programs for them. If you want perfection you usually are even more interested in the source code to implement it the way it suits your program or game without redundancies or decreasing the performance rather than just involving a whole different project without knowing its code which is also shipping with a big uncertainty and of course ruining your reputation and the reputation of your game looking very weak and unprofessional when you admit that you had to use GameWorks etc.

Yes, every game developper should read AMDGPU and Unigine source codes.

When I do create a new website I read the Firefox and PHP source codes so that I would not be ruining my reputation and the reputation of my websites.

I will never admit I had to use Wiki or Drupal or Prestashop, that would be looking very unprofessional and very weak.

[bug77]

Stop making so much sense, this is a pro-AMD forum, it does not matter if arguments are complete bullshit, they must be pro-AMD.

/sarcasm

Minot nitpick, but I don't think people on Phoronix are pro-AMD as much as they are pro-open source.
I prefer open source, too, but to me software is primarily a tool: I use it to get things done. When I need a hammer, I pick the best hammer for the job*, I don't care if parts of its design are patented or public domain.

*or the one I can find, depending on occasion

[starshipeleven]

I could imagine a Vulkan, OpenCL, etc.- supporting GPU pretty easily that keeps all that it takes to expose these interfaces on the circuit board or memory chip.

[Passso]

Minot nitpick, but I don't think people on Phoronix are pro-AMD as much as they are pro-open source.
I prefer open source, too, but to me software is primarily a tool: I use it to get things done. When I need a hammer, I pick the best hammer for the job*, I don't care if parts of its design are patented or public domain.

*or the one I can find, depending on occasion

Considering all the posts I read here I can confirm that people on Phoronix are pro-AMD far more than they are pro-open source.

Think about the Intel bashing, even if their driver stack is open source