Direct Rendering Infrastructure

--- Chris Ison <wildcode@...> wrote:
> I know you can't give details under NDA, but do the specs for the
> r200
> show any API for PCI, or has the PCI work on the driver been done by
> trial and error.

I'll have to check the docs when I get home.  The original PCI GART
work does done for HP for radeon support on Alpha.  At the time it was
just for regular radeons.  Michel did some re-arranging fairly recently
to unify the gart code between PCI and AGP.


> 
> Also I am wondering if there is any word on specs for r250 and r300.
> If
> not, I would like to know what the best supported card is in DRI with
> the least "software implemented GL".
> 
> 

I assume you are talking about r350.  the r250 is just a variation of
the r200 core and docs are available for that.  no 3D databooks are
available yet for r300 to my understanding.  I don't know if that will
change in the future or not.  I'd say the best supported cards are r200
based radeons (8500 to 9200 cards).


Alex


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/

On Fri, 2003-11-28 at 07:37, Alex Deucher wrote:
> I'd say the best supported cards are r200 based radeons (8500 to 9200 cards).

And which one is the fastest? 

-- 
Torgeir Veimo <torgeir@...>

Torgeir Veimo wrote:

>On Fri, 2003-11-28 at 07:37, Alex Deucher wrote:
>  
>
>>I'd say the best supported cards are r200 based radeons (8500 to 9200 cards).
>>    
>>
>
>And which one is the fastest? 
>
>  
>
Arguably the Radeon 9100.

Just make sure you don't get some crappy card with a 64-bit memory 
interface; it'll perform like crap no matter how good the drivers are.

David Bronaugh

> >>I'd say the best supported cards are r200 based radeons (8500 to 9200 cards).
> >>    
well thats just great, I was hopeing to see something different other
than r200 as I have had nothing but trouble and poor performance with
them with DRI. I have yet to determine why but since AGP ppl have really
good performance even in 1x, its looking like somethings happening with
the PCI side, or mesa is using software rendering for PCI for some
reason where it doesn't on the AGP.

NOTE: they are only theories based on AGP testimonials.

It'd be good to get some advice/direction on how I'd go about finding
this out.

I would also like to note that my radeon 9000 is an r250 chip, so maybe
there is a slight difference between the r200 and r250 that is killing
the performance, but Its highly unlikely otherwise 9000pro users would
see simular performance issues.

On Fri, 2003-11-28 at 08:49, David Bronaugh wrote:
> Torgeir Veimo wrote:
> 
> >On Fri, 2003-11-28 at 07:37, Alex Deucher wrote:
> >  
> >
> >>I'd say the best supported cards are r200 based radeons (8500 to 9200 cards).
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >And which one is the fastest? 
> >
> >  
> >
> Arguably the Radeon 9100.
> 
> Just make sure you don't get some crappy card with a 64-bit memory 
> interface; it'll perform like crap no matter how good the drivers are.

Well, I got a cheap 9100. It doesn't perform as good as my previous
geforce Ti4200, and they managed to cripple it by having an analogue
only DVI connector. But hey, it used open source drivers!

The 9100 only exist in versions with 128bit memory interface, or is it
dependent on manufacturer?

-- 
Torgeir Veimo <torgeir@...>

On Fri, 2003-11-28 at 22:36, Chris Ison wrote:
> > >>I'd say the best supported cards are r200 based radeons (8500 to 9200=
 cards).
> > >>   =20
> well thats just great, I was hopeing to see something different other
> than r200 as I have had nothing but trouble and poor performance with
> them with DRI. I have yet to determine why but since AGP ppl have really
> good performance even in 1x, its looking like somethings happening with
> the PCI side, or mesa is using software rendering for PCI for some
> reason where it doesn't on the AGP.

You can check the Mesa and 3D driver debugging output for fallbacks
yourself, but both behave exactly the same regardless of the bus type.

As you may have gathered from reading this list, it's basically a
mystery.


PS: Does anyone have an idea why Chris's posts seem to get through to
the list directly, but also appear in the administrative queue?

--=20
Earthling Michel D=C3=A4nzer      |     Debian (powerpc), X and DRI develop=
er
Software libre enthusiast    |   http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=3Ddaenzer

Your best bet, if you can find one, is a fireGL 8800.  It's basically
an overclocked 8500.  barring that the 8500's and 9100's are the next
fastest.

Alex


--- Torgeir Veimo <torgeir@...> wrote:
> On Fri, 2003-11-28 at 07:37, Alex Deucher wrote:
> > I'd say the best supported cards are r200 based radeons (8500 to
> 9200 cards).
> 
> And which one is the fastest? 
> 
> -- 
> Torgeir Veimo <torgeir@...>
> 
>

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree

On Fri, 28 Nov 2003, Alex Deucher wrote:

>Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 23:08:04 -0800 (PST)
>From: Alex Deucher <agd5f@...>
>To: Torgeir Veimo <torgeir@...>,
>     "dri-devel@..." <dri-devel@...>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>Subject: Re: Radeon PCI API
>
>Your best bet, if you can find one, is a fireGL 8800.  It's basically
>an overclocked 8500.  barring that the 8500's and 9100's are the next
>fastest.

The 8800 is a faster R200 based board.  It's not overclocked 
however.

-- 
Mike A. Harris