Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mesa 24.1 Now Supports Vulkan Explicit Synchronization On X11

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

  • duby229
    replied
    Originally posted by mSparks View Post

    Not at all, that is specifically a wayland problem not at all related to explicit or implicit sync.
    explicit sync does provide a mechanism for them to address it, but implicit sync does not require that the compositor waits on every app to finish rendering before giving other apps permission to start rendering, that was just a design choice inherent in the previously single threaded nature of wayland.
    ^^^ This...

    So for AMD and Intel users, you won't notice any difference between switching from implicit sync to explicit sync. Externally from the perspective of the user it looks implicit, but internally from the perspective of the driver its already explicit.

    Leave a comment:


  • mSparks
    replied
    Originally posted by dragon321 View Post

    Every modern graphics stack is built around explicit sync, it is superior in any possible way for modern hardware.
    yes
    Originally posted by dragon321 View Post
    I guess that doesn't matter for X11 loyalists,
    why would it? X11 was always multithreaded and left synchronisation up to the application- even if that meant some applications had tearing if you didn't enable vsync.

    All that's changed is up until a few months ago implicit sync and single threaded wayland was the promised land everyone would want to replace X11 with, and now it is slowly sinking in that hypothesis was BS.
    Last edited by mSparks; 18 April 2024, 07:50 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • dragon321
    replied
    Originally posted by Weasel View Post
    Obviously it's for Mesa since Nvidia always supported explicit sync (and only explicit sync). And it only sucked on Wayland because it already worked on X11.

    I'm not sure if that's supposed to be a bad thing, I guess hysterical Wayland fanboys cannot be reasoned with after all.
    Every modern graphics stack is built around explicit sync, it is superior in any possible way for modern hardware. I guess that doesn't matter for X11 loyalists, since they believe that over 30 years old protocol is still the best then there is no reason why would they care about graphics stack doing sync like in the 80's and believe it is still good design.

    I have to admit the way how X11 loyalists think: "I don't know why this is bad but since it is modern and Wayland does it then it has to be bad." is quite interesting.
    Last edited by dragon321; 18 April 2024, 07:23 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • mSparks
    replied
    Originally posted by Myownfriend View Post

    A Karen is a, ..... They'll make a big deal out of something until they get their way.
    If you don't want to be identified as a Karen, then don't behave like one.

    Simples.

    Leave a comment:


  • mSparks
    replied
    Originally posted by curfew View Post
    the problem with implicit sync was that one slow app could block the whole desktop rendering because the compositor is stuck waiting for every app to finish rendering the waited-for frame.
    Not at all, that is specifically a wayland problem not at all related to explicit or implicit sync.
    explicit sync does provide a mechanism for them to address it, but implicit sync does not require that the compositor waits on every app to finish rendering before giving other apps permission to start rendering, that was just a design choice inherent in the previously single threaded nature of wayland.

    Leave a comment:


  • Myownfriend
    replied
    Originally posted by mSparks View Post
    You aren't missing out, you were never allowed in.
    Guess you didn't catch the sarcasm in my words either.

    Please do yourself a favor and learn what a Karen is though because you're going to embarrass yourself.

    Actually, I'll tell you. A Karen is a, usually middle aged, white woman who feels entitled to special treatment. She might try to use her whiteness to put someone of color in danger. That's a common example. An another example would be someone asking for a refund on something they used well passed it's warranty or something and they make a big deal out of it when they're refused. That's why "Can I speak to your manager" is associated with Karens. They'll make a big deal out of something until they get their way.
    Last edited by Myownfriend; 18 April 2024, 04:54 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • curfew
    replied
    Originally posted by mSparks View Post
    framerate is a terrible measure of graphics performance and its use needs to stop.
    1 frame after 30ms followed by 100 frames with 1ms between them (700fps, typical of implicit sync systems) is visibly worse performance than
    100 frames with 5ms between them (200fps, the target of explicit sync'd systems)

    And the difference them is the synchronisation methods
    You're kind of right yet still keep talking out off your ass. As explained in the aforementioned blog post, the problem with implicit sync was that one slow app could block the whole desktop rendering because the compositor is stuck waiting for every app to finish rendering the waited-for frame. Explicit sync in turn allows each app to update their portions independently, and the compositor will just use the latest frame from each app when pushing stuff to the screen for users.

    Explicit sync is the required for being able to render frames at constant intervals instead of having one frame render after 30 ms and then be stuck for 100 ms waiting for the next one.

    Leave a comment:


  • mSparks
    replied
    Originally posted by curfew View Post
    Not true. The synchronization mechanism directly affects framerate when vsync is enabled. It is very much related to vsync. This was pretty well explained in the KDE blog post that was also referenced here on Phoronix only a few days ago.
    framerate is a terrible measure of graphics performance and its use needs to stop.
    1 frame after 30ms followed by 100 frames with 1ms between them (700fps, typical of implicit sync systems) is visibly worse performance than
    100 frames with 5ms between them (200fps, the target of explicit sync'd systems)

    And the difference between them is the synchronisation methods
    Last edited by mSparks; 18 April 2024, 04:56 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Magissia
    replied
    Originally posted by mxan View Post
    So much for XOrg being dead and receiving no updates meanwhile wayland is still as useless as it was 16 years ago
    While Wayland stack is not ready to replace Xorg for all usages, there's no need to troll like that. And before you call me anything, I'm still on Xorg.

    I really which to see a proper successor to Xorg, since many works on the Wayland stack, I hope it gets mature enough soon.

    Leave a comment:


  • curfew
    replied
    Originally posted by mxan View Post

    Read this : https://zamundaaa.github.io/wayland/...icit-sync.html

    Explicit sync has nothing to do with VSync, explicit sync allows an application to tell the driver it's done rendering and sync everything.
    Not true. The synchronization mechanism directly affects framerate when vsync is enabled. It is very much related to vsync. This was pretty well explained in the KDE blog post that was also referenced here on Phoronix only a few days ago.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X