> Specifically, we do not want to build > the bus interface into the chip. Currently we would need support for > AGP and PCIe based MotherBoards,
For slot based cards, "currently" would include PCI as well as AGP and PCIe. It appears that OGD1 will be PCI-X for some reason. I hope this doesn't carry over into OGC1. > but we have no way of knowing what we > would need next year. My crystal ball says AGP will go away very soon. My crystal ball says PCI will go away, but slower than AGP. The problem will be too few slots per board. (Even worse than now.) My crystal ball says PCIe will be good for several years. The real unserved market is Ethernet, but I don't expect to be able to convince anyone of that. > We can compete with commodity items as > long as the commodity items have closed source drivers. However, we can > only compete on this basis with Linux and BSD users. Or provide something (in addition to openness) that the commodity items do not. > Can we get the performance we need with 65 nm or do we need > to go smaller? If the design were ready today, could we even get 65 nm? Isn't AMD still using 90 nm? > > If I want an OpenGL card, I will buy a nVidia or ATI card that is > > reasonably well supported by an open source driver. In fact, I > > already have, several times. Sure, I can't play games with texture > > compression, or using the very latest card, but that will apply to an > > OGP card too. But, guess what? The Radeon 9200 (with open source > > drivers) in my machine will probably outmatch any OGP design, and > > will cost a negligible amount of money by the time any OGP design > > tapes out. Is there any area where the OGC1 is faster than a Radeon 9200/9250? Or equally fast with less CPU load? > This is something to consider. While nVidia and ATI do not actually > make native OpenGL cards they do dominate the market to the detriment of > the *NIX graphics market. Solaris is some form of open source now, right? What graphics/video chips do Sun's machines use? > > I, personally, do not want a 3D card for GUI use at all. I want a GUI > > that works, and works responsively, and smoothly. Ex-Amiga users > > will know what I mean. Everyone else has yet to experience what I am > > talking about. > > I have not experienced what you are talking about but I do experience > what I think that you are complaining about. IIUC, this is not a > function of the graphics card but rather of the way that *NIX does > multitasking. UNIX will block user I/O to do other things -- a very > broken idea for GUIs. Some distros try to ameliorate this by bumping X > up to Nice=-10, but I don't see that this really helps. What versions of Unix block I/O to do other things? It is normally I/O that gets preference. You mention "distros", so is this something specific to linux? > I think that what you need to address this without rewriting parts of > the Linux Kernel is to have a CPU dedicated to running X. If so, someone needs to rewrite the Linux Kernel. _______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
