Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mesa 12.1-dev Is Off To The Races

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

  • #11
    Sounds good! I only started playing The Talos Principle very recently on a lowly 4670. It looks okay bar a weird streaky textures glitch and it's perfectly playable but it could be a lot better. I'll probably be upgrading to Polaris ASAP though.

    Comment


    • #12
      Originally posted by Azpegath View Post
      Well the dreams would be:
      4. The FOSS AMDGPU completely replaces RadeonSI (with improved performance) so AMD can focus their development on one stream.
      This doesn't make sense. AMDGPU is the kernel driver, RadeonSI is the OpenGL implementation in Mesa. They're used together. I think you'd mean more that the closed source userspace in the AMDGPU-PRO hybrid is replaced completely by RadeonSI, but that's not going to happen due to things that it does that will probably never make it in to Mesa (Compatibility profiles, special FireGL features, etc...)

      Comment


      • #13
        And here I am, waiting for fp64 emulation on pre-GCN HW

        Comment


        • #14
          Originally posted by adler187 View Post

          This doesn't make sense. AMDGPU is the kernel driver, RadeonSI is the OpenGL implementation in Mesa. They're used together. I think you'd mean more that the closed source userspace in the AMDGPU-PRO hybrid is replaced completely by RadeonSI, but that's not going to happen due to things that it does that will probably never make it in to Mesa (Compatibility profiles, special FireGL features, etc...)
          Plus there's still the r600g driver (and its radeon kernel part, assuming in the above amdgpu replaces it for cards using radeonsi).

          Comment


          • #15
            Originally posted by asdfblah View Post
            And here I am, waiting for fp64 emulation on pre-GCN HW
            Why? That seems kind of silly.

            Comment


            • #16
              Originally posted by smitty3268 View Post

              Why? That seems kind of silly.
              Isn't it needed for OpenGL > 3.1?

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by asdfblah View Post
                Isn't it needed for OpenGL > 3.1?
                It's needed for OpenGL 4+, you should already have 3.3 support.

                But what's also good enough for providing OpenGL 4 is this line:
                MESA_EXTENSION_OVERRIDE=GL_ARB_gpu_shader_fp64 ./executable

                Since nothing actually uses fp64, that's it. You're done, no waiting required.

                Comment


                • #18
                  My fuck! What is that beautiful thing in the photo?
                  Yeah, I figure that it must be the Talos Principle, but I am quite impressed by how beautiful it looks.

                  I don't have the knowledge to predict how long it will take for Mesa to get a higher OpenGL version. But does anyone here know what program/game uses the the highest OpenGL version on Linux? I haven't heard of anything that's actually using OGL 4.5, if even 4.4.

                  Vulkan would be nice, just as it would be nice to see it being developed for in games. I wonder when it will be that Vulkan will be picked up more.

                  How much hope is there of OpenCL getting upgraded in Mesa? Radeon badly needs an upgrade, hopefully to at-least 2.0. But we still don't have any implementation of OpenCL 2.1 on any driver. What would it take for this to develop in Mesa?

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Originally posted by asdfblah View Post
                    Isn't it needed for OpenGL > 3.1?
                    It's needed for >3.3, but only if you have religious objections to using Mesa's existing over-ride mechanism to force the extension on. To the best of our knowledge no games actually *use* the fp64 extension, it's just a checkbox requirement for GL 4.0.

                    I'm not sure if a similar over-ride is required for GL_ARB_vertex_attrib_64bit - if it is then it might be easier to force the GL level rather than forcing both extensions.
                    Test signature

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Originally posted by bridgman View Post

                      It's needed for >3.3, but only if you have religious objections to using Mesa's existing over-ride mechanism to force the extension on. To the best of our knowledge no games actually *use* the fp64 extension, it's just a checkbox requirement for GL 4.0.

                      I'm not sure if a similar over-ride is required for GL_ARB_vertex_attrib_64bit - if it is then it might be easier to force the GL level rather than forcing both extensions.
                      Originally posted by smitty3268 View Post

                      It's needed for OpenGL 4+, you should already have 3.3 support.

                      But what's also good enough for providing OpenGL 4 is this line:
                      MESA_EXTENSION_OVERRIDE=GL_ARB_gpu_shader_fp64 ./executable

                      Since nothing actually uses fp64, that's it. You're done, no waiting required.
                      Ah, thank you! Actually, I had read about this, but forgot...
                      Now I wonder, should I set these env vars only for games? Is it dangerous to set them system-wide?

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X