Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMD's opensource lies exposed

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

  • #41
    Originally posted by glxextxexlg View Post
    What if the user not only watches a video but does something like this at the same time?

    http://craftymind.com/factory/html5v...nvasVideo.html

    Destroy the video for several times and see the CPU cycles cry. It gets near the computation limit of my Athlon 64 X2 5600+ which is clearly a high-end class hardware. And this is only a low-res video
    I can play it flawlessly (destroying the video several times) with my 1.4Ghz cpu and without any h264 offloading.
    ## VGA ##
    AMD: X1950XTX, HD3870, HD5870
    Intel: GMA45, HD3000 (Core i5 2500K)

    Comment


    • #42
      Originally posted by glxextxexlg View Post
      yes they double and so the resolution and codec complexity of the videos!
      That you're saying that means you're...twelve, maybe? I distinctly remember the 17" monitor I got in 2001 supporting 2560x1920. I kept it at 1600x1200 so I could get the 100Hz refresh rate. Not 1280x1024. Not 1280x720. Not 1920x1200. Do you know how many displays (of any size) have been made in the past five years that can touch that? Not without pretty deep pockets, you don't. Resolutions have gone down, and display technology is almost as bad as printing technology at maintaining a pace greater than "glacial".

      Comment


      • #43
        I can play it flawlessly (destroying the video several times) with my 1.4Ghz cpu and without any h264 offloading.
        Did you check your cpu usage? What happens if anything beside the browser is open on your desktop? And this is only a low-res 640x360 video...

        Comment


        • #44
          So let me understand the point of this thread.

          AMD promised open specs, AMD delivered open specs.

          Therefore, AMD is lying.

          OK, great thread, enjoy it :P

          Comment


          • #45
            Originally posted by glxextxexlg View Post
            Did you check your cpu usage?
            Yes, no more than 50%.
            ## VGA ##
            AMD: X1950XTX, HD3870, HD5870
            Intel: GMA45, HD3000 (Core i5 2500K)

            Comment


            • #46
              Originally posted by Wyatt View Post
              I distinctly remember the 17" monitor I got in 2001 supporting 2560x1920.
              Got a make and model number for that? I have my doubts.

              Comment


              • #47
                Why do you say AMD/ATI are lying? Who do you think are the developers of the free ATI driver?
                Good question. AMD is lying because they will never deliver opensource OGL3x/4x and video acceleration support to their customers. AMD dropped support for r300 - r500 hardware in early 2009 and they left development of the open drivers to independent developers like marek olsak and corbin simpson. It took them a very long time and tremendous amounts of unpaid hard work to make r300g an OK driver and it still is not ready for mainstream use.
                And yes they will drop support for their "older" r600/r700 hardware. And people won't be able to play new games released for linux (OilRush etc) that use OGL3x/4x, or do the magic things available with the html5 WebM, WebGL for a very long time with linux. Because r600-700 development will be shifted to independent devs and that hardware is orders of magnitude more complex than r300-r500 hardware.

                The result is people saying:
                Originally posted by people
                this linux is not a good OS coz it doesn't run even a native game developed for it.

                Comment


                • #48
                  Originally posted by glxextxexlg View Post
                  Good question. AMD is lying because they will never deliver opensource OGL3x/4x and video acceleration support to their customers.
                  They never claimed they would, so they can't be lying, by definition.

                  AMD dropped support for r300 - r500 hardware in early 2009 and they left development of the open drivers to independent developers like marek olsak and corbin simpson. It took them a very long time and tremendous amounts of unpaid hard work to make r300g an OK driver and it still is not ready for mainstream use.
                  It took them a long time, because the Gallium stack and KMS were not ready yet, and this is clearly not Marek's or Corbin's fault.

                  And yes they will drop support for their "older" r600/r700 hardware. And people won't be able to play new games released for linux (OilRush etc) that use OGL3x/4x, or do the magic things available with the html5 WebM, WebGL for a very long time with linux. Because r600-700 development will be shifted to independent devs and that hardware is orders of magnitude more complex than r300-r500 hardware.
                  This is all lots of ifs and maybes, 3 years from now.

                  Most of OpenGL3 infrastructure in Mesa is almost ready. r600/r700 can only do OpenGL3, no more. So actually, we're on a good way.

                  But this is another thing that needs to be sorted out in Mesa first, before HW-specific drivers support it. I would also like more corporate funding in Mesa (Intel and VMWare are doing most of the funding now), but still AMD is doing more for Mesa than Nvidia.

                  Comment


                  • #49
                    Originally posted by Wyatt View Post
                    I distinctly remember the 17" monitor I got in 2001 supporting 2560x1920. I kept it at 1600x1200 so I could get the 100Hz refresh rate. Not 1280x1024. Not 1280x720. Not 1920x1200. Do you know how many displays (of any size) have been made in the past five years that can touch that?
                    Note: not to be taken seriously. Since this thread is pretty much doomed anyway, here's my contribution to the flame war:

                    What??? What kind of super-duper-nuclear-fusion-powered 17" monitor was that?? I have an Eizo T960 21" CRT that tops at [email protected] (default modes only) and everything is just so small at that resolution that I would never even consider using it a whole day. Oh, and it has a maximum 115KHz horizontal scan frequency, which is pretty high when it comes to CRTs, and can "only" go up to 92Hz on 1600x1200 (the resolution I use). The monitor you describe would need at least a 125KHz Horizontal scan frequency, which wouldn't make much sense on a 17" monitor. And, the only way to get those kind of high resolution video modes would be to create them in X.org or with xrandr.

                    Comment


                    • #50
                      Originally posted by glxextxexlg View Post
                      Good question. AMD is lying because they will never deliver opensource OGL3x/4x and video acceleration support to their customers. AMD dropped support for r300 - r500 hardware in early 2009 and they left development of the open drivers to independent developers like marek olsak and corbin simpson. It took them a very long time and tremendous amounts of unpaid hard work to make r300g an OK driver and it still is not ready for mainstream use.
                      And yes they will drop support for their "older" r600/r700 hardware. And people won't be able to play new games released for linux (OilRush etc) that use OGL3x/4x, or do the magic things available with the html5 WebM, WebGL for a very long time with linux. Because r600-700 development will be shifted to independent devs and that hardware is orders of magnitude more complex than r300-r500 hardware.

                      The result is people saying:
                      http://www.techeye.net/hardware/amd-...dows-and-linux

                      I seriously doubt that an r500 would be able to play oil rush anyway

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X