I may be mistaken, but my understanding is that the ATI/AMD drivers which enable CAL on Windows and Linux also enable OpenCL for the ATI/AMD GPU. If that is the case, and if the OpenCL application is faster, then it seems that there should be no reason to have the CAL application at all.
Of course, CAL does not support Macs, but Apple's OpenCL implementation supports most modern ATI/AMD GPUs and is standard on current versions of OS X. So it also makes sense to have OpenCL but not CAL applications for Macs. Cheers, --Charlie -- Charlie Fenton [email protected] BOINC / SETI@home Macintosh & Windows Programmer Space Sciences Laboratory UC Berkeley On Jan 29, 2013, at 4:27 PM, David Anderson wrote: > The project should adjust its app_plan() function so that > the estimated FLOPS for the OpenCL version > is higher than that for the CAL version. > -- David > > On 29-Jan-2013 4:01 PM, Raistmer the Sorcerer wrote: >> SETI@home has both OpenCL ATi and Brook+ (CAL) apps for one of its >> subprojects. Currently CAL app distributed to all CAL-capable ATi devices, >> including OpenCL capable ones. As was shown with CUDA apps on SETI beta BOINC >> can't select fastest app if few available. CAL app much slower than OpenCL >> app. So, feature needed to allow server to send CAL app only to CAL-only >> capable hosts (not send if host supports OpenCL too) and OpenCL app for >> OpenCL+CAL/OpenCL hosts. AFAIK currently it''s not possible. _______________________________________________ boinc_dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ssl.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/boinc_dev To unsubscribe, visit the above URL and (near bottom of page) enter your email address.
