PDA

View Full Version : ATI 2900 and the tessellator unit?



Mars_999
06-30-2007, 09:59 AM
Has anyone here gotten the 2900 card and tried out the new tessellator unit with OpenGL? Does ATI even have support for this yet?

kon
06-30-2007, 10:12 AM
There's an example in the new sdk.
http://ati.amd.com/developer/SDK/Samples_Documents.html

bobvodka
06-30-2007, 12:07 PM
I'm guessing you are refering to the GS-NPatch-Tessellation example?

If so the 'GS' part indicates that it is running on the Geometry Shader unit and not the programmable tessellator of the card.

Zengar
06-30-2007, 01:30 PM
ATI still has no advanced opengl support for latest cards (they didn't even bother to implement the FBO multisample/blit extensions), and there is no evidence that they will in nearest future. I tried asking Humus on the b3d forums if some support is planned, but he seems to have just ignored the question.

bobvodka
06-30-2007, 03:53 PM
Maybe they are just waiting on LP now? *shrugs*

Mars_999
06-30-2007, 05:27 PM
Well if ATI does drop GL support than I guess they just made my decision for me on what I want to program on. Nvidia all the way.

Korval
06-30-2007, 06:41 PM
Well if ATI does drop GL supportConsidering that they still have a seat on the ARB, I doubt they're dropping GL support.

More than likely, they're dropping support (or rather, not supporting) for things that current GL-based products don't use. The batch of recent extensions, for example, aren't used by anything of importance yet.

And since they're still working on stuff for the ARB, odds are they're throwing their actual development budget behind a Longs Peak & Mt. Evans implementation.

Roderic (Ingenu)
07-01-2007, 01:55 AM
AFAIK, ATi just rewrote OpenGL drivers for Vista and is working on LP/ME rather than OpenGL 2.x, which is not such a bad choice IMO.

Jan
07-01-2007, 02:02 AM
As mentioned by some ATI folks, they have a completely rewritten driver that is supposed to be released "soon". I would think that they don't care to implement stuff in their "old" (current) driver, and instead will finish their new one.

LP is one additional reason not to waste your resources on implementing stuff, that won't last long.

Apart from that, i'd like to say, that i don't think ATI's drivers are that bad. I work with an ATI card, but need to develop for nVidia at the moment, and from my experience nVidia's drivers have at least as many subtle bugs, that ATI's have. So, from my experience ATI isn't that bad. It might have been a while ago.

Jan.

bobvodka
07-01-2007, 06:32 AM
Originally posted by Mars_9999:
Well if ATI does drop GL support than I guess they just made my decision for me on what I want to program on. Nvidia all the way. I'm trying to work out where in anything that was said before you got the impression ATI were 'dropping OGL support'.. doing so would be so many levels of stupid it's just unreal, certainly with ET:QW around the corner which is a major OGL game.

Vista does indeed have an improved OGL component, for example when changing the render target count it no long does the dumb rebuilding of the shaders which was seen on XP. Although the lack of PBOs makes me sad :(

Mars_999
07-01-2007, 05:15 PM
To Bobvodka,

Read this post to see why I said my statement.


Originally posted by Zengar:
ATI still has no advanced opengl support for latest cards (they didn't even bother to implement the FBO multisample/blit extensions), and there is no evidence that they will in nearest future. I tried asking Humus on the b3d forums if some support is planned, but he seems to have just ignored the question.

Korval
07-01-2007, 05:54 PM
Read this post to see why I said my statement.That still doesn't suggest them dropping OpenGL support.

As I said, they're clearly not working on 2.1-based features and extensions. The reasoning could be to put their effort behind Longs Peak.

Mars_999
07-01-2007, 06:15 PM
If they are that's great.

bobvodka
07-01-2007, 08:29 PM
Also, Humus has said before he can't comment on internal AMD/ATI things which haven't been made public, so while it could be considered 'rude' to not reply I dare say he is busy and as he can't comment just put it to one side.

End of the day, they wouldn't be putting the effort, man power and money into a new LP spec if they didn't intend on supporting it (certainly from a cash angle as AMD aren't rolling in the money either...)

CrazyButcher
07-02-2007, 02:31 AM
for all the demos and other info Humus has released, I'd say it is rude calling him rude for not replying to everything like demanding him being an official spokesman about everything related to ATI.

Zengar
07-02-2007, 03:42 AM
Yes, it's true. And I can understand if he can't comment on it (I sure won't if I would work for ATI). But still, something like "sorry, I can't comment" would be nice. I won't ever dare accusing Humus of being rude, he is a nice and talented guy, but I do consider ATI being ignorant of OpenGL. Well, they have their own problems now... I would be happy if they could provide good LP implementation.

k_szczech
07-02-2007, 07:35 AM
Well, they have their own problems now...I guess these problems have a name: GeForce 8800 and GeForce 8600.
ATI seems to have skipped mid-range DX10 GPU's (X2600) and went straight for X2400. I guess that's a reasonable move, since NVIDIA has allready taken a lot of market with 8800. Competing with NVIDIA in mid range and then in slow GPU's could be risky, so I think they simply moved into market, where NVIDIA is not present yet (no 8200-8300 GPU's).

Mars_999
07-02-2007, 03:29 PM
Humus is anything but rude. I have talked with Humus in the past on various items concerning OpenGL and he is always helpful and knowledgeable. Whether it's ATI or Nvidia it would be nice to have at least some kind of heads up on the status of OpenGL for developers.

It is not a secret what features DX10 or DX9 hardware has... so any new on what may be coming or a ETA would be nice is all most people are asking for. But I never got a red firetruck for Xmas either as a kid...

V-man
07-02-2007, 04:36 PM
IMO, the problem is with GL. There isn't a company behind it. D3D has a single company behind it and they make sure a single D3D implementation is released. It makes it a whole lot simpler.

Has Intel released GL 2.0 drivers for their chipsets? Do they support FBO and all the newer extensions?

It's the biggest weakness of GL.

Brolingstanz
07-02-2007, 05:07 PM
What doesn't kill us makes us stronger...

bobvodka
07-03-2007, 08:08 AM
I'm not completely sure you can apply that saying to an API ;)

PkK
07-04-2007, 03:03 AM
Originally posted by V-man:

Has Intel released GL 2.0 drivers for their chipsets? Do they support FBO and all the newer extensions?
Not yet, but with Mesa 7.0 supporting OpenGL 2.1 a major step toward it has been done. AFAIK the i965 driver will soon do hardware-accelerated GLSL shaders and is intended to support full OpenGL 2.1.

Philipp

knackered
07-04-2007, 06:07 AM
wow, i must get me an intel.

Jan
07-04-2007, 08:08 AM
What does Mesa have to do with Intel?? Maybe the execution speed is the same, but apart from that?

PkK
07-04-2007, 08:29 AM
Mesa is a framework for an OpenGL implementation. The software renderer is just one part of Mesa as are the free DRI drivers.
Mesa and it's software renderer have to support a feature before it can be implemented in a driver (unless you want to write driver-specific software fallbacks).
Sine Intel is the last major graphics vendor to give specifications to developers their graphics engines are well supported: Many features supported, stable drivers (compared to ATI or Nvidia where everything has to be reverse-enginered to write free drivers).

[Of course nothing of this applies to Windows drivers]

Humus
07-04-2007, 08:39 AM
Originally posted by Mars_9999:
Has anyone here gotten the 2900 card and tried out the new tessellator unit with OpenGL? Does ATI even have support for this yet? It's not supported yet in either OpenGL or D3D.

Humus
07-04-2007, 08:46 AM
Originally posted by kon:
There's an example in the new sdk.
http://ati.amd.com/developer/SDK/Samples_Documents.html We don't have anything in our SDK using the tessellator yet. However, this is something we'll definitely look into adding a sample for once there is proper driver support in place.

Humus
07-04-2007, 09:22 AM
Originally posted by Zengar:
ATI still has no advanced opengl support for latest cards (they didn't even bother to implement the FBO multisample/blit extensions), and there is no evidence that they will in nearest future. I tried asking Humus on the b3d forums if some support is planned, but he seems to have just ignored the question. I don't think I've seen that question. I've been away for more than a month in a business trip + vacation. During that time I think I check B3D only once.

Let me also take this opportunity to clarify what my job is. I'm not part of the OpenGL driver team, nor am I an official spokesperson of AMD. It's not my job to answer OpenGL or AMD questions on public forums. If I don't answer a question, it might be because I don't know the answer. I certainly don't know everything about our OpenGL driver or what the GL driver plans are. My job title is "ISV Engineer". This means I'm a contact person for tier-1 developers. If you're a developer from Id, Raven, Epic etc., then you come to me. If not, developer relations will take care of you. I do have plenty of contact with devrel people, and they sit in the cubes next to mine, and I take care of some stuff that's sent to them that they pass along to me. However, it's not my job to take care of hobby coders. It's not my job to read this or other forums. It's something I normally do on my spare time. Sometimes if I have time available at work I look into a bug someone has reported here and pass along to the driver team, but if I'm dealing with a tier-1 developer at the moment, I'm not going to spend any significant amount of time looking into problems reported here. Replying to messages here is almost exclusively done on my spare time. Only in rare cases do I post from work.

Humus
07-04-2007, 09:53 AM
Originally posted by Mars_9999:
Well if ATI does drop GL support than I guess they just made my decision for me on what I want to program on. Nvidia all the way. AMD is not dropping GL support.

Humus
07-04-2007, 09:58 AM
Originally posted by Jan:
As mentioned by some ATI folks, they have a completely rewritten driver that is supposed to be released "soon". I would think that they don't care to implement stuff in their "old" (current) driver, and instead will finish their new one.It's released already on Vista and on XP as well for the HD 2000 series. The legacy driver is not being worked on except for critical bug fixes.

Jan
07-04-2007, 10:10 AM
Oh, really. I expected more PR when the switch was made. Well, it is a good thing it is done already.

Jan.

V-man
07-04-2007, 11:03 AM
Originally posted by PkK:
Mesa is a framework for an OpenGL implementation. The software renderer is just one part of Mesa as are the free DRI drivers.
Mesa and it's software renderer have to support a feature before it can be implemented in a driver (unless you want to write driver-specific software fallbacks).
Sine Intel is the last major graphics vendor to give specifications to developers their graphics engines are well supported: Many features supported, stable drivers (compared to ATI or Nvidia where everything has to be reverse-enginered to write free drivers).

[Of course nothing of this applies to Windows drivers] So we are talking about Linux.
I'm not sure I understand what you are saying. Are you saying Mesa is the solution to have uniform and stable GL support on Linux?
Also, are you saying it is better to have an Intel graphics instead of nVidia or ATI?

On Apple, I know that Apple considers GL as a first class citizen.

On Windows... IMO, there is no simple solution. You take it as is or leave it :)

Zengar
07-04-2007, 02:20 PM
@Humus: I know, and I am not accussing you of anything. Sorry if my words appeared to be offensive.

Humus
07-05-2007, 09:09 AM
No offense taken. :)
Just wanted to clarify since much of this thread seemed to about me for some reason.

bobvodka
07-05-2007, 12:27 PM
Originally posted by Jan:
Oh, really. I expected more PR when the switch was made. Well, it is a good thing it is done already.

Jan. While it's 'done' the current state of the x64 driver, while improved, is missing at least one extension in the XP x64 driver and has just stopped me working on something (the PBO extension) :(

(my thoughts were basically 'hmmm, it could be cool if I could do this, could process it on the gpu then copy to... vertex... mem... oh ffs, no PBO extension any more...')

PkK
07-05-2007, 12:36 PM
So we are talking about Linux.
Linux and FreeBSD. You didn't specify an OS in your original question.


I'm not sure I understand what you are saying. Are you saying Mesa is the solution to have uniform and stable GL support on Linux?
On Linux most OpenGL drivers are based on Mesa. Therefore OpenGL 2.1 support in Mesa is an important step towards OpenGL 2.1 support in the drivers including the i965 driver, the driver that supports Intel's latest graphics solution.


Also, are you saying it is better to have an Intel graphics instead of nVidia or ATI?
Intel cards have good driver support on Linux. IMO that makes them the best low-end graphics solution. Of course they're behind ATI's and Nvidia's high-end cards performance-wise.