Normally it comes to to a bit of both. Ideally openGL should have been the del facto standard, but however due to squabbling and poor implementations of the standard (Microsoft wanting to punt directX and Apple with not supporting all the required calls) have lead to it use been minimal compared to what it should have been.
Hopefully the community at large can now see the benefits of having standards that works both cross application and cross operating systems. Hopefully OpenEXR2 and OpenVDB will lead the way on this. Maybe openGL will make a comeback ;) NVIDIA have been very aggressive in getting their CUDA tech working in a wide range of places. ATI was very low key and has suffered because of it ( I am assuming because of the change of owners a few times tends to muddy the road map) Unfortunately because of its market dominance NVIDIA now has a very compelling reason to try and squash openCL where it can ;( ________________________________________ From: Jason S [jasonsta...@gmail.com] Sent: 21 April 2013 08:00 PM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: AMD & MAXON Cinema 4D. Apart from one card which I had to boot twice to boot my computer, I never had many problems specific with ATI, except of course for CG shaders and Cuda things not working. (being quite a biggie) But what puzzles me is why developpers predominantly choose Cuda as opposed to OpenCL since OpenCL works on both platforms? Is it technical reasons? or it's a Marketing thing? (Cuda sounding cooler?) But for me, questionable ATI driver quality mostly has to do with the interface, or general presentation. (not that I often go fiddle with driver settings but..) Everything is so "tacky" or like WindowsXP-y Maybe Mr. Kodury might bring some influence from Mac on that side :) On 21/04/2013 1:44 PM, Tim Leydecker wrote: > A bit of news: > > Raja Koduri is going from Apple to AMD, becoming orporate Vice > President Visual Computing. > > His tasks will include hard&software development for mobile and > desktop GPUs. > > He´s been with AMD from 2001-2009, working on the R300 chips (Radeon > HD9700/Pro) and > it´s successors. > > Personally, I can´t say much about ATI cards but the one that came > with my MacPro2008. > It wasn´t fast but Maya worked on it without glitches. Generally, the > AMD/ATI windows drivers > are said to have be frustrating in the past. > > I would hope that the OpenGL and general driver quality for AMD > graphics cards gets a better > reputation by putting in more quality control. > > I would think that there is a good chance this will happen as at least > one next generation console > is going to use AMD chips and the tests including the technical > specifications and burn-in of such > a plattform may benefit any related products, if only for a rigorous > testing pipeline in place already... > > Cheers, > > tim > > > > On 21.04.2013 07:59, Sam wrote: >> I said I haven’t bought one, but I’ve dealt with many of them, both >> from friends and Family (which is why I haven’t bought one). I would >> think that after 20 years they would get >> their issues straightened out, but from what I’ve seen they haven’t >> learned anything over the years. The last one I dealt with was about >> 6 months ago and I was shocked at how >> dated the driver panel seemed. I felt like I was dealing with windows >> 3.1 technology by the way the thing was put together. Using it just >> felt like the person or people who created >> it just didn’t care how well it worked. If AMD (ATI) cards work for >> you, great, but it’s going to take some pretty massive changes for me >> to seriously consider using them again. >> >> I think with programs like C4d and Modo, the developers go out of >> their way to write their programs to work with them. I remember Modo >> 1.0 worked well with ATI (from what I heard >> on the forums), but it had a lot of problems with NVidia cards. I >> seem to remember that the developers were all using ATI cards at the >> time… >> >> *From:*softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com >> [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] *On Behalf Of >> *Raffaele Fragapane >> *Sent:* Friday, April 19, 2013 12:37 AM >> *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com >> *Subject:* Re: AMD & MAXON Cinema 4D. >> >> I'm not an ATI fan, but if you haven't tried one in 20 years maybe >> you might be a bit unreasonable :) >> >> While drivers wise nVIDIA still has an edge, and usually every >> generation they are the top performer for a while longer (although >> that's a chasing game), AMD has been on top of >> bang for buck for quite a while, and once you find a decent driver >> you can stick with it for quite a while with good success, just they >> are fewer and further apart than nVIDIA's, >> which also has had many messed up releases. >> >> It's not healthy to be so strongly prejudiced, while I don't think >> it's there yet for me to consider as a viable alternative, but I also >> have some time invested in CUDA and none in >> OCL, AMD is worth keeping an eye out for, and it's far from the >> catastrophic experience it was five years ago on average. >> >> For the record, C4D has run absolutely flawlessly on ATI for year >> now, all the way back to the first radeons. >> >> On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 12:44 PM, Sam <sbowl...@cox.net >> <mailto:sbowl...@cox.net>> wrote: >> >> My motto for video cards is “if it says ATI AMD on the outside it’s >> crap on the inside”. I don’t care how fast a card is, if the drivers >> suck, the card is going to suck. ATI >> drivers have always sucked (first one I bought was about 20 years ago >> (it was also the last one I bought)) and it hasn’t changed since AMD >> took over. I’ve had friends buy the cards >> because of the benchmarks and they have always had problems, and just >> recently I had to fix my niece’s laptop because the latest AMD update >> made her 3d games unplayable (built her >> a computer with an NVIDIA card for Christmas so I would never have to >> deal with it again). I honestly have never known anyone who had an >> ATI card that was happy with it. >> >> *From:*softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com >> <mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com> >> [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com >> <mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com>] *On Behalf Of *Sven >> Constable >> *Sent:* Thursday, April 18, 2013 11:20 AM >> *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com >> <mailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com> >> *Subject:* RE: AMD & MAXON Cinema 4D. >> >> "…AMD FirePro™ W-Series is fully tested, certified & optimised for >> MAXON Cinema 4D…" >> >> I don't buy that anymore. I bought a FirePro couple years ago >> (actually it was its predecessor named FireGL), just because AMD >> claimed the same for Softimage (fully certified, yeah >> right). They should have stated "…viewport glitches and selection >> hangs have been reduced somewhat..." :) >> >> *From:*softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com >> <mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com> >> [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] *On Behalf Of >> *Leoung O'Young >> *Sent:* Thursday, April 18, 2013 16:21 >> *To:* xsi >> *Subject:* AMD & MAXON Cinema 4D. >> >> Interesting development between Maxon and AMD >> Maxon is busy setting up partnerships, Adobe, and now AMD >> Now if only Autodesk will start doing some of this with Softimage, I >> will be a happy man >> >> http://www.animationxpress.com/images/AMD_FirePropacks_more_speed.html >> *AMD FirePro™ W-Series packs more speed, power and performance to >> fuel stunning, cutting-edge 3D animations in MAXON Cinema 4D.* >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship >> it and let them flee like the dogs they are! >> = <table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" style="width:100%;"> <tr> <td align="left" style="text-align:justify;"><font face="arial,sans-serif" size="1" color="#999999"><span style="font-size:11px;">This communication is intended for the addressee only. It is confidential. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and destroy the original message. You may not copy or disseminate this communication without the permission of the University. Only authorised signatories are competent to enter into agreements on behalf of the University and recipients are thus advised that the content of this message may not be legally binding on the University and may contain the personal views and opinions of the author, which are not necessarily the views and opinions of The University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. All agreements between the University and outsiders are subject to South African Law unless the University agrees in writing to the contrary. </span></font></td> </tr> </table
