Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMD's Vulkan Driver Will Only Work With The AMDGPU Kernel Driver

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

  • geearf
    replied
    Originally posted by chuckula View Post

    Sure you did. And I was a sniper in Afghanistan with over 200 confirmed kills because I wrote it on the Internet.
    To be fair (I don't know the truth whatsoever), you can find the resume of a guy named Marc Driftmeyer easily, and he did work for both NeXT and Apple, but in no particular impressive way (no offense Marc!), so I'm not sure why someone would lie about that...

    Leave a comment:


  • geearf
    replied
    Originally posted by MaxToTheMax View Post

    Suppose I'm a game developer, and I only have the time/budget/inclination to target one graphics API. I'm less likely to pick an API if a significant percentage of my potential customers don't have drivers that support it. Plenty of people still have HD5000-6000 cards, so not supporting Vulkan on those cards will have the effect of hindering Vulkan adoption. If I have to write an OpenGL backend, I may not bother with a Vulkan backend. Frankly, this is bad news for AMD, since AMD's OpenGL/DirectX<12 performance is not competitive.

    The fact that you might not get performance gains out of pre-GCN hardware is not relevant; not supporting Vulkan on that hardware is still a bad decision for AMD because it will hinder Vulkan adoption, and AMD needs Vulkan to catch on.
    Although I do agree with your post mostly, let me disagree with the first sentence
    If you're a game dev with little time, most likely you're not writing your own 3D engine but using an existing so it's a moot point.
    Your whole arguments works better for a 3d engine dev

    Leave a comment:


  • chuckula
    replied
    Originally posted by Marc Driftmeyer View Post

    Hey dick shit, when I worked at NeXT and Apple what I post about it is actual past experience. Suck it up buttercup. If you don't like it too fucking bad.
    Sure you did. And I was a sniper in Afghanistan with over 200 confirmed kills because I wrote it on the Internet.

    Anyway, even if you were Steve Job's fluffer for a while in the 80s, that just proves that you really ought to know better than to make asinine biased statements that even a North Korean drone could call out as being stupid.

    I don't really care that you've invented an appeal to authority logical fallacy where you pretend that you are the mythical "authority" I've seen your stupid drivel posted on way too many websites and it's pretty clear that, like your former boyfriend Jobs, you're a marketer who doesn't know jack shit about how technology actually works.

    Leave a comment:


  • artivision
    replied
    AMD is trying to force Tier3 (Async Compute) with DX12 and Vulcan from the beginning because they have the advantage. They try to convince everyone to optimize their games and Post Processing FX for Async Compute and give less attention to what happens when this future is not there. Since Tier1 GPUs will not get the new APIs anyway (AMD's doing). That will backfire as always when Devs may not use those low level APIs shortly and for this exact reason.

    Leave a comment:


  • smitty3268
    replied
    Originally posted by MaxToTheMax View Post

    Suppose I'm a game developer, and I only have the time/budget/inclination to target one graphics API. I'm less likely to pick an API if a significant percentage of my potential customers don't have drivers that support it. Plenty of people still have HD5000-6000 cards, so not supporting Vulkan on those cards will have the effect of hindering Vulkan adoption. If I have to write an OpenGL backend, I may not bother with a Vulkan backend. Frankly, this is bad news for AMD, since AMD's OpenGL/DirectX<12 performance is not competitive.
    This would be a lot more convincing if all the current game developers weren't already just completely skipping AMD support entirely. They ship games that say flat out that they'll only work on NVidia right now (on linux), so at this point they could switch to Vulkan and actually boost the number of AMD cards they were supporting.

    Also, most devs use engines these days with backends that are prebuilt. It's only hobbyists that are trying to write the backends themselves.

    Leave a comment:


  • theriddick
    replied
    Originally posted by MaxToTheMax View Post
    Plenty of people still have HD5000-6000 cards, so not supporting Vulkan on those cards will have the effect of hindering Vulkan adoption.
    Most developers don't even support those cards in their minimal requirement anymore. 7000 series certainly however. I just hope I don't need to wait 10years after vulkan release to get good drivers for my 390x....

    Leave a comment:


  • MaxToTheMax
    replied
    Originally posted by agd5f View Post

    You could do theoretically do vulkan on pre-GCN parts, but it you wouldn't gain much over existing APIs. Pre-GCN hardware does not have independent compute pipes, so compute and graphics could not be submitted asynchronously and executed in parallel. Shader resources are fixed so you can only have a limited number of resources in flight at any given time and you'd have to explicitly bind the resources at execution time. If someone wants to work on vulkan support for older parts, I certainly won't stop you, just don't expect much of a gain compared to older APIs.
    Suppose I'm a game developer, and I only have the time/budget/inclination to target one graphics API. I'm less likely to pick an API if a significant percentage of my potential customers don't have drivers that support it. Plenty of people still have HD5000-6000 cards, so not supporting Vulkan on those cards will have the effect of hindering Vulkan adoption. If I have to write an OpenGL backend, I may not bother with a Vulkan backend. Frankly, this is bad news for AMD, since AMD's OpenGL/DirectX<12 performance is not competitive.

    The fact that you might not get performance gains out of pre-GCN hardware is not relevant; not supporting Vulkan on that hardware is still a bad decision for AMD because it will hinder Vulkan adoption, and AMD needs Vulkan to catch on.

    Leave a comment:


  • jrch2k8
    replied
    Well to be honest AMD said Vulkan will come first as closed source driver and will be eventually open source, hence is painfully obvious that only AMDGPU will get it since is the one kernel driver infrastructure for both open source and closed driver from now on. This doesn't mean AMD will not support RadeonSI class hardware in the future(i heavily suspect part of the kernel code is actually missing and their focus is on AMDGPU for now[to receive the blob part of the driver] )

    Leave a comment:


  • Nille_kungen
    replied
    Originally posted by chuckula View Post

    I believe that piece of garbage statement is true just about as much as I believe that nonsense you post about how you personally founded NeXT with Steve Jobs and other fantasy stories that you like to post all over the internet.
    Instead of calling Marc an liar try looking him up on the net.
    Personally i like when people that actually been around tells their stories.

    Leave a comment:


  • theriddick
    replied
    People are reading more into what HAS NOT been said about AMDGPU and Vulkan drivers, which is what concerns everyone the most. How long I wonder till Vulkan is out I wonder? hope its end of this month or next...

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X