Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The New SuperTuxKart Looks Better, But Can Cause GPU/Driver Problems

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

  • #51
    Originally posted by dungeon View Post
    And why they didn't support OpenGL 2.1 path is above my mind , it still works fine besides skid particles and nitro invert rendered, kart preview missing in menus... blah, that should be easely fixed

    That way minimum requirement should easely be down to the decade old hardware like ATi HD2600/ nVidia 6600
    All HD2XXX (r600+) support at least OpenGL 3.3. So it is the minimum requirement. On the nvidia side, 8XXX up is OpenGL 3.3 Granted, 8 years old, not 10.

    Serafean.

    Comment


    • #52
      I'm glad to see some more improvements to SuperTuxKart. The game itself isn't half bad, but the graphics really needs an upgrade. I've been following the development for a while and I can see there has been some improvements to lighting and shadows. I don't however like the changes to use HDR/Bloom, which most games uses nowadays. Utilizing newer OpenGL is a must, especially when writing efficient shaders. The game still suffers from terrible low polygon count, texture resolution and poor animations.

      Originally posted by kaprikawn View Post
      For a game that's pretty much the poster child for FOSS gaming, that's poor. If anything it should be the other way around, they should be recommending the open source drivers and it should have been developed to work on those first.
      No, all software should be written against the specification. If the drivers don't behave according to specifications, the drivers themselves needs to be improved.

      Comment


      • #53
        Originally posted by bms20 View Post
        You must be kidding me. The commercial variant of OpenGL offered by NVidia is hundreds of man years ahead. There is no comparison.

        Try going to http://www.shadertoy.com and watch the open source drivers implode....

        These should serve as a basis for improving the oss drivers.

        I'm not an NVidia fanboy; I'd like Sandy Bridge to work well - its just that it doesn't...

        -bms

        Debian Testing (current), near none tweaks.
        HD5850, Mesa.
        Iceweasel 31.3, about:config:
        webgl.shader_validator true
        webgl.force-enabled true
        webgl.prefer-native-gl true

        Comment


        • #54
          Originally posted by efikkan View Post
          I'm glad to see some more improvements to SuperTuxKart. The game itself isn't half bad, but the graphics really needs an upgrade. I've been following the development for a while and I can see there has been some improvements to lighting and shadows. I don't however like the changes to use HDR/Bloom, which most games uses nowadays. Utilizing newer OpenGL is a must, especially when writing efficient shaders. The game still suffers from terrible low polygon count, texture resolution and poor animations.

          No, all software should be written against the specification. If the drivers don't behave according to specifications, the drivers themselves needs to be improved.
          Why not create legacy renderers? There are so much devices! Obviously Opengl 1.x is out, but 2.x? Cut userbase just because of special effects?!.. People still prefer Jagged Alliance 2 to all newer versions, you know?

          Comment


          • #55
            Originally posted by dungeon View Post
            For settings 4 it works (besides those lines on any), on 5 there are many other problems.



            It can also be problem in game (engine) it is so new(ly forked), i found Bloom effect makes GPU faults on Windows and Linux with Catalyst, the same with opensource radeonsi, that should be bug for engine.

            See the list of "known driver bugs" for Antartica engine, no vendor excluded

            http://supertuxkart.sourceforge.net/...ow_Drivers_Bug
            I was talking about shadytoy.com, and so was the radeonsi user. The FOSS drivers on our systems can't even run that site.

            Comment


            • #56
              Originally posted by dungeon View Post
              @haagch

              And that texture compression do weird things too on radeonsi, basicaly effects on 4 with only disabled texture compression should be max safe settings currently... that works fine here
              Nope, the "advanced pipeline" is completely broken for me. Even these settings like http://i.imgur.com/63eSogP.png make it look like http://i.imgur.com/SThxBqE.png

              Comment


              • #57
                Odd...Can you fill a bug on github ?
                The code base of supertuxkart. Contribute to supertuxkart/stk-code development by creating an account on GitHub.

                With your gpu, mesa version and log from stk ?

                By the way did you build Mesa with floating point texture ?

                Comment


                • #58
                  Originally posted by haagch View Post
                  Nope, the "advanced pipeline" is completely broken for me. Even these settings like http://i.imgur.com/63eSogP.png make it look like http://i.imgur.com/SThxBqE.png
                  That is how looks like to me to with the same settings and any other when advanced pipeline checked, but with unpatched mesa of course.

                  Applying just this one https://freedesktop.org/patch/38706/ fixed it.

                  llvm is 3.6-svn224505, floated point textures are enabled...

                  Comment


                  • #59
                    Originally posted by Serafean View Post
                    All HD2XXX (r600+) support at least OpenGL 3.3. So it is the minimum requirement. On the nvidia side, 8XXX up is OpenGL 3.3 Granted, 8 years old, not 10.

                    Serafean.
                    Ah i might didn't explain what i am really thinking i talking about clear 2.1 path that still works in this beta... that should probably work even on r300 hardware, only "requirements" are npot textures that hardware misses, that is why i virtually raised requirements to HD cards and not beceuse those have otr not GL3 support .

                    So 2.1 advertised GL version with npot textures as minimum, well name those cards if you can i can't - some nvidia "2.1" have it and completely missed from r300 ati hardware

                    Comment


                    • #60
                      Originally posted by brosis View Post
                      Cut userbase just because of special effects?!.. People still prefer Jagged Alliance 2 to all newer versions, you know?
                      But people probably prefer Witcher 2 rather than Super Mario Bross

                      Support OpenGL 2.1 would be great. A lot of people which I know still have graphics cards with OpenGL 2.1 only. But after some time this will be deprecated too. If we have limited time for programming, better is to improve GL3 based engine to make it working well instead of trying to support everything (which would mean no progress).

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X