Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

R600g AMD Evergreen Geometry Shaders Proposed

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

  • #31
    Unfortunately "Metro: Last Light" still hangs the GPU (CYPRESS).

    Originally posted by archibald View Post
    I'm going to cast a vote for "Thank you Mr. Airlie and Mr. Girlin for your work on this.", if I ever meet you, I should like to buy you beer.
    +1
    And thanks to Red Hat too.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by TemplarGR View Post
      I am sorry, did i hurt your feelings?

      It is not "trolling", it is a legitimate complaint.
      if i would be in arlied shoes, i'd need to ponder damn hard on why the fsck do i care and provide ppl with my work just to get attacked for doing so. there is a reasonable criticism and there is unreasonable one. at the end of the day all that oss developer can do is work on projects he is interested in with following project guidelines as best as he can. only really self absorbed users can think that his whims are so important that someone will stop doing everything they like doing just to please them. where is the fun in that? why bother at all?

      if your beef is with amd, then put up and shut up while you go and switch vendor on a whim. it is also in your right to anti advocate their products, why not? you do need to stress out beef you have with them somehow

      Originally posted by TemplarGR View Post
      They won't. Customers will be avoiding their products because they hate planned obsolescence. If i wanted a more powerfull gpu or opengl4.x, i would get one. It is my right to want to stay with my hardware if it satisfies my needs.

      If AMD wants to play games with driver support to force me to upgrade, i will pick Nvidia or Intel. They don't do that...
      in translation... to AMD you're not a customer, you're a cost. your comment basically self excludes you from that fact. you stick with old card and don't want to buy new one. and if old one is not supported, you'll switch vendor. wth bother then? you won't buy it in any case

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by archibald View Post
        I'm going to cast a vote for "Thank you Mr. Airlie and Mr. Girlin for your work on this.", if I ever meet you, I should like to buy you beer.
        +1 and i raise it to a sixpack for work on virgil3d. that would be my most anticipated project related to 3d

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by TemplarGR View Post
          The preference for newer gpu series in the radeon driver is a generic phenomenon. It is not simply about these patches from Airlie.

          In general, the radeon devs, AMD and non AMD alike, focus on newer gpus, and forfeit the older ones, even though the older are without catalyst support.

          It is this focus that i don't like.
          It's the same focus all vendors take. There are a number of GL extensions that older Intel chips support in hardware that the open source Intel driver doesn't currently support. In both the Intel and AMD case, the source is there, the documentation is available, and there are developers you can talk to.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by TemplarGR View Post
            So, HD2000, HD3000 and HD4000 series take the middle finger ONCE AGAIN, while HD5000+ which is still supported by catalyst gets better open source support too? Why i am not surprised?
            Read the damn article:
            I don't think r600/r700 support is that hard, but I haven't had time to look at it at all
            So stop blaming Dave for not having time. For Evergreen and more he already needed months cause his time is so limited! So instead of blaming why not give your time to implement the missing pieces?
            Right now DPM for my 3870 is highly problematic even though for modern gpus is on by default.
            Maybe because the hardware is weaker? What do you think all the "DPM fixes" we see in every kernel release cycle are for?
            UVD is non-existent. Even though for modern gpus it is not.
            Yea, blame the devs for the stupidity of the lawyers... you know that the UVD support we have right now took months (or was it years?) for passing the legal review?
            And now, geometry shader support comes first for HD5000, even though it is not needed. Anyone needing it uses fglrx right now...
            Yea, cause I would ever touch that piece of shit (fglrx) which crashes my computer and, last time I tried it, didn't even got 3d to work at all... There are more r600g users on Evergreen+ than you think!
            PS: My comment is not about Airlie, obviously he is not AMD.
            He's the one who enabled support on Evergreen+, not AMD itself... So now you're blaming AMD for Daves work? That doesn't make sense at all.

            But back to topic: Thanks Dave for your work! Hopefully you'll get the last little bugs out soon so we see it in Mesa 10.1

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by curaga View Post
              You can't really expect anything from the volunteers. For example, I was asked about r300g, but since I have no such cards, what could I do?

              Surely you don't expect volunteers to go purchase card X to please you.
              If you think you'll have time to work on it, i'd be glad to ship you an extra X1300 that I have
              PM me if you're interested.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by archibald View Post
                I'm going to cast a vote for "Thank you Mr. Airlie and Mr. Girlin for your work on this.", if I ever meet you, I should like to buy you beer.
                +1

                Also, I love it how the drivers keep improving, yet the moaning stays the same. First it was "we have no 3D, nothing works, this sux", then it was "we have GL, but no DPM, no UVD, this will fry my bgalls, this sux". Then it was "We have full OpenGL, full DPM, full UVD, full performance, but it does not yet work on my specific 10-year old card, this sux".

                Haters will hate. The rest of us have virtually fully-features, fully supported OPEN driver instead of fucking around with hundred-megabyte blobs with each kernel upgrade and black screens when it fails.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by justmy2cents View Post
                  if i would be in arlied shoes, i'd need to ponder damn hard on why the fsck do i care and provide ppl with my work just to get attacked for doing so. there is a reasonable criticism and there is unreasonable one. at the end of the day all that oss developer can do is work on projects he is interested in with following project guidelines as best as he can. only really self absorbed users can think that his whims are so important that someone will stop doing everything they like doing just to please them. where is the fun in that? why bother at all?
                  +1. I couldn't put it better myself.
                  if your beef is with amd, then put up and shut up while you go and switch vendor on a whim. it is also in your right to anti advocate their products, why not? you do need to stress out beef you have with them somehow
                  The problem is people prematurely buy things when they hear a CORPORATION promise to do something they want, and therefore feel entitled that it should work as soon as they claim it. I personally own a pair of HD5750s. I bought these solely for the use of Windows, but as time went on, I ditched my old nvidia-based computer and now I have linux on this new(er) setup. I'm not thrilled about the experience but I am very happy that I no longer need catalyst. I have a couple games that are unable to play on the open source drivers, and I don't get crossfire support, but I can wait.
                  in translation... to AMD you're not a customer, you're a cost. your comment basically self excludes you from that fact. you stick with old card and don't want to buy new one. and if old one is not supported, you'll switch vendor. wth bother then? you won't buy it in any case
                  I see your point, and in a corporate perspective you're absolutely right. But the idea is you're not buying a GPU strictly for the hardware - you're also paying for the driver support. If the drivers are shoddy or incomplete, that's a problem. AMD is responsible to provide the drivers. On the other hand, if they don't explicitly claim the GPU has linux support, they are not obligated in any sense to make it linux compatible. AMD continues to work on Catalyst because it supplies everything the hardware demands. It doesn't mean its optimized or even usable to 3rd party software, but it exists, and as long as it exists they are (unjustly) able to dismiss complaints.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    It is always amusing to find out how out of touch are most "western" people with reality these days...

                    You feel, you don't think. And that's the [email protected] problem...

                    So what is your problem and you defend AMD's attrocious policies with such a passion? One could think you are AMD's employees...

                    There is no excuse for not providing support for 4 years old hardware. No excuse at all. It buffles me how consumers can go out of their way to defend corporations' profits, while damaging the quality of goods and services they receive... Only paid shills would do that, and fanbois...

                    Amd decided to drop support for quite decent hardware performance-wise. Don't tell me for example that a 4870 x2 can't play modern games easily...

                    We didn't pay for the silicon. The silicon costs next to nothing. Packaging costs next to nothing. Shipping costs next to nothing. We paid for their engineering and for their DRIVERS.

                    Since they are competing with Nvidia, and most gpus are priced according to competitive performance, it is unethical for AMD to cut the costs of driver support. Nvidia still pays for older hardware, so you are actually paying the same amount of money for more support...

                    It is my right to complain as much as i like. This is a public forum. You and i do not live in North Korea as far as i can tell. Not yet. USA is approaching this kind of state fast.. But for now there is still freedom of speech, and since i don't use foul language and i do not spread lies, i can write whatever i want.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by schmidtbag View Post
                      +1. I couldn't put it better myself.

                      The problem is people prematurely buy things when they hear a CORPORATION promise to do something they want, and therefore feel entitled that it should work as soon as they claim it. I personally own a pair of HD5750s. I bought these solely for the use of Windows, but as time went on, I ditched my old nvidia-based computer and now I have linux on this new(er) setup. I'm not thrilled about the experience but I am very happy that I no longer need catalyst. I have a couple games that are unable to play on the open source drivers, and I don't get crossfire support, but I can wait.

                      I see your point, and in a corporate perspective you're absolutely right. But the idea is you're not buying a GPU strictly for the hardware - you're also paying for the driver support. If the drivers are shoddy or incomplete, that's a problem. AMD is responsible to provide the drivers. On the other hand, if they don't explicitly claim the GPU has linux support, they are not obligated in any sense to make it linux compatible. AMD continues to work on Catalyst because it supplies everything the hardware demands. It doesn't mean its optimized or even usable to 3rd party software, but it exists, and as long as it exists they are (unjustly) able to dismiss complaints.
                      lol, believe me that i understand those points very well. the only fact that i went ballistic for the said words was that criticism went to the people we owe damn lot since they work out of their own enthusiasm and considering we pay nothing for that work, we get damn good bang for the buck from their work. long ago, i was in the same shoe on some oss project. couldn't take it from few a-holes and left it to rot

                      btw, if this was catalyst thread, i'd join and be even louder than Templar. it's nothing more than reasonable to expect bang for the buck and at least some support that lasts longer than one takes to drink one beer like amd does it

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X