Originally posted by Azpegath
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Bettering Radeon Gallium3D Performance With PCI-E 2.0
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by darkbasic View PostJust in time for PCI-E 3.0
Didn't image such a big boost, at least in Windows the boost is very little with pci-e 2.0
Windows has PCIe 2.0 support from day 1. Back in those days, the cards available couldn't use the added bandwidth, but if you'd do the tests today, you'd definitely see bigger gains.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Azpegath View PostUnless they start merging stuff from Catalyst to the FOSS drivers. I don't quite understand why they don't do that. I assume that the FOSS devs have access to the closed source code for Catalyst. I mean, what's the difference between merging actual Catalyst code and re-implementing it from open specifications? In the end, the functionality (and to some extent the code) should be the same.
Comment
-
But I imagine looking at e.g. the power saving code could still tell a very good programmer why radeon on the "low" profile still uses more power than fglrx.
I mean, why doesn't AMD simply have somebody going over the code of catalyst, deleting everything patented or "secret" and release the nonfunctional rest? Could still be helpful for low level stuff like power saving and communicating properly with the hardware...
Comment
-
Originally posted by ChrisXY View PostBut I imagine looking at e.g. the power saving code could still tell a very good programmer why radeon on the "low" profile still uses more power than fglrx.
I mean, why doesn't AMD simply have somebody going over the code of catalyst, deleting everything patented or "secret" and release the nonfunctional rest? Could still be helpful for low level stuff like power saving and communicating properly with the hardware...
Comment
-
Originally posted by ChrisXY View PostBut I imagine looking at e.g. the power saving code could still tell a very good programmer why radeon on the "low" profile still uses more power than fglrx.
I mean, why doesn't AMD simply have somebody going over the code of catalyst, deleting everything patented or "secret" and release the nonfunctional rest? Could still be helpful for low level stuff like power saving and communicating properly with the hardware...
mesa ppl already knows very clearly (prolly) what all the missing bits are and globally whats needed to face catalyst very close, what ppl seems to don't understand no matter how many times is explained is that mesa have like 5 DEVELOPERS and the code to handle GPU is EXTREMELY COMPLEX so is not like you can't magically shave out of your ass a couple of houndred thousand of lines code to magically make all work
Comment
-
I just have the bad feeling that AMD will lose against intel in the GPU side too, on Linux.
I wished they could focus on one thing but make it right.
Missing features from r600g are 2D Tiling,HiZ, apparently PCI-E2, power saving. Why it is a problem for AMD employee to look at the catalyst, and see how these features are implemented(registers involved, state transitions, specific chips code-paths, etc), and re implement them on r600g? I am not talking here about *super secret* shader compiler(which nvidia may steal, and somehow adapt to their totally different architecture), but just enablement code.
Comment
-
Originally posted by ChrisXY View PostBut I imagine looking at e.g. the power saving code could still tell a very good programmer why radeon on the "low" profile still uses more power than fglrx.
I mean, why doesn't AMD simply have somebody going over the code of catalyst, deleting everything patented or "secret" and release the nonfunctional rest? Could still be helpful for low level stuff like power saving and communicating properly with the hardware...
The challenge enabling things like tiling isn't "not knowing how to enable", it's that enabling tiling requires changes in a lot of different places and since the driver architectures are different you can't just look at the proprietary driver and find the corresponding areas in the open driver.Test signature
Comment
Comment