Philipp Klaus Krause wrote:
Does anyone have figures for the MOST time consuming parts of
software 3D in the Mesa libs? Those would be the logical bits to push
into hardware first. But I'm not sure I've ever seen a profile output
from X to say which parts are actually most would benefit more
Rogelio Serrano wrote:
On 2004-10-25 04:10:30 +0800 Vladimir Dergachev
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If there weren't all those patents out there we might just try to
develop a free graphics chip.
I have thought about this (repeatedly - the idea gets very tempting
after asking for the docs for the
Does anyone have figures for the MOST time consuming parts of software
3D in the Mesa libs? Those would be the logical bits to push into
hardware first. But I'm not sure I've ever seen a profile output from X
to say which parts are actually most would benefit more from
acceleration than
This was discussed in lkml a few days ago. A hardware company is
considering building an open fpga based video card. Although the target is
mainly 2d accel its a good start. There was a lot of discussion about off
screen rendering and support for the new compositing model in xorg. You
can see
Vladimir Dergachev wrote:
What could work, however, is to make a *board* that is capable of decent
3d. Put lots of memory, lots of bandwidth and several DSP to approximate
the same level of raw floating-point power as 3d GPUs. Leave everything
else to the software.
This reminds me of TIGA
On 2004-10-25 15:11:00 +0800 Vladimir Dergachev
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snipped...]
I see. Thats a good idea too. We just have to look for a
company willing to
do that. I have long been convinced that designing the
hardware like this
is the only way to go.
Just for fun here are some
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004, Mike Mestnik wrote:
--- Philipp Klaus Krause [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thank you for doing this work. We really need to get the open-source
ATI driver on par with the propretary driver (both feature-wise and
performance-wise).
But sadly we will NEVER match it.
NO
Dave Airlie wrote:
r200 render path looks really A LOT better, unfortunately the open-source
driver doesn't implement the required extensions (some bits of documentation
are missing afaik, and even if not (I have no idea what's in the documentation
or not) it would probably quite a bit of work as
Am Sonntag, 24. Oktober 2004 19:38 schrieb Bernardo Innocenti:
Dave Airlie wrote:
r200 render path looks really A LOT better, unfortunately the open-source
driver doesn't implement the required extensions (some bits of
documentation are missing afaik, and even if not (I have no idea what's
On Sunday 24 October 2004 19:38, Bernardo Innocenti wrote:
Even though I just have a Radeon 9200, I'm very excited about the
ongoning R300 effort and with there was a similar project for NVidia
cards too.
If that with above is a wish like I think it probably is, you might want
to have a look
Thank you for doing this work. We really need to get the open-source
ATI driver on par with the propretary driver (both feature-wise and
performance-wise).
But sadly we will NEVER match it.
NO SmoothVision, HyperZ docu ever
The nonfree xig driver has been developed without HyperZ docs and
Am Sonntag, 24. Oktober 2004 20:20 schrieb Philipp Klaus Krause:
Thank you for doing this work. We really need to get the open-source
ATI driver on par with the propretary driver (both feature-wise and
performance-wise).
But sadly we will NEVER match it.
NO SmoothVision, HyperZ docu
Philipp Klaus Krause wrote:
Thank you for doing this work. We really need to get the open-source
ATI driver on par with the propretary driver (both feature-wise and
performance-wise).
But sadly we will NEVER match it.
NO SmoothVision, HyperZ docu ever
The nonfree xig driver has been
Am Sonntag, 24. Oktober 2004 20:10 schrieb Bernardo Innocenti:
CC trimmed.
Dieter Nützel wrote:
Thank you for doing this work. We really need to get the open-source
ATI driver on par with the propretary driver (both feature-wise and
performance-wise).
But sadly we will NEVER match it.
Dieter Nützel schrieb:
The nonfree xig driver has been developed without HyperZ docs and
outperforms fglrx.
Are you sure.
I thought Xig had it all before.
Do you have actual numbers?
Haven't looked at them for very long time, but I bought the first version of
there X server 1994 (?) for mga.
Am Sonntag, 24. Oktober 2004 20:45 schrieb Philipp Klaus Krause:
Dieter Nützel schrieb:
The nonfree xig driver has been developed without HyperZ docs and
outperforms fglrx.
Are you sure.
I thought Xig had it all before.
Do you have actual numbers?
Haven't looked at them for very
Dieter Nützel wrote:
Thank you for doing this work. We really need to get the open-source
ATI driver on par with the propretary driver (both feature-wise and
performance-wise).
But sadly we will NEVER match it.
NO SmoothVision, HyperZ docu ever
Do you really need the datasheet to get these to
Dieter Nützel wrote:
The asm output looks quite readable: you can see symbol names
and accesses to PCI registers (base ptr + offset).
A bad original for DRI;-)
This information should only be used to write a header file
describing the registers. Of course I'm not talking about
cutting pasting
--- Philipp Klaus Krause [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thank you for doing this work. We really need to get the open-source
ATI driver on par with the propretary driver (both feature-wise and
performance-wise).
But sadly we will NEVER match it.
NO SmoothVision, HyperZ docu
--- Philipp Klaus Krause [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dieter Nützel schrieb:
The nonfree xig driver has been developed without HyperZ docs and
outperforms fglrx.
Are you sure.
I thought Xig had it all before.
Do you have actual numbers?
Haven't looked at them for very long
Mike Mestnik wrote:
--- Philipp Klaus Krause [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thank you for doing this work. We really need to get the open-source
ATI driver on par with the propretary driver (both feature-wise and
performance-wise).
But sadly we will NEVER match it.
NO SmoothVision, HyperZ
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004, Nicolai Haehnle wrote:
On Sunday 24 October 2004 19:38, Bernardo Innocenti wrote:
Even though I just have a Radeon 9200, I'm very excited about the
ongoning R300 effort and with there was a similar project for NVidia
cards too.
If that with above is a wish like I think it
--- Adam K Kirchhoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mike Mestnik wrote:
--- Philipp Klaus Krause [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thank you for doing this work. We really need to get the
open-source
ATI driver on par with the propretary driver (both feature-wise and
performance-wise).
If there weren't all those patents out there we might just try to
develop a free graphics chip.
I have thought about this (repeatedly - the idea gets very tempting after
asking for the docs for the Nth time) and I don't think it is feasible to
make an actual chip. By the time we are finished
Mike Mestnik wrote:
--- Adam K Kirchhoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mike Mestnik wrote:
--- Philipp Klaus Krause [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thank you for doing this work. We really need to get the
open-source
ATI driver on par with the propretary driver (both
On Sunday 24 October 2004 14:16, Nicolai Haehnle wrote:
On Sunday 24 October 2004 19:38, Bernardo Innocenti wrote:
Even though I just have a Radeon 9200, I'm very excited about the
ongoning R300 effort and with there was a similar project for NVidia
cards too.
If that with above is a wish
On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 08:10:14PM +0200, Bernardo Innocenti wrote:
IANAL, but reverse engineering is perfectly legal here in Europe
and probably even in the USA if your goal is achieving
compatibility.
Have to be careful - most folks doing reversing do a clean-room
implementation (1 person
On 2004-10-25 04:10:30 +0800 Vladimir Dergachev
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If there weren't all those patents out there we might just
try to
develop a free graphics chip.
I have thought about this (repeatedly - the idea gets very
tempting after
asking for the docs for the Nth time) and I don't
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004, Rogelio Serrano wrote:
On 2004-10-25 04:10:30 +0800 Vladimir Dergachev [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
If there weren't all those patents out there we might just try to
develop a free graphics chip.
I have thought about this (repeatedly - the idea gets very tempting after
asking
On 2004-10-25 11:11:56 +0800 Vladimir Dergachev
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004, Rogelio Serrano wrote:
On 2004-10-25 04:10:30 +0800 Vladimir Dergachev
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
If there weren't all those patents out there we might just
try to
develop a free graphics chip.
I
r200 render path looks really A LOT better, unfortunately the open-source
driver doesn't implement the required extensions (some bits of documentation
are missing afaik, and even if not (I have no idea what's in the documentation
or not) it would probably quite a bit of work as core mesa
Bernardo Innocenti wrote:
The only thing I'm complaining about is the light torch: the aura
looks good, but the projected light circle is invisible most of the
times. Other lightning effects look fine, including dangling lights
in ceilings.
Actually, those rendering errors are pretty bad in some
32 matches
Mail list logo
