AMD’s Answer To Nvidia’s GameWorks, GPUOpen Announced – Open Source Tools, Graphics Effects, Libraries And SDKs

[christianled59]

Being tied to a distro doesn't has to mean that you're tied to their update process: some distros allow you to update the offending parts manually if needed. And even on distros that have tight control you can usually activate things like custom repositories to force updates if needed.

Again, that doesn't mean updates to fix a specific issue would come any quicker than on windows. Considering how many users there are in windows, microsoft has a pretty damn high priority to fix security exploits.

[Misanthrope]

Again, that doesn't mean updates to fix a specific issue would come any quicker than on windows. Considering how many users there are in windows, microsoft has a pretty damn high priority to fix security exploits.

 

It doesn't means that it would be any slower either: the amount of affected users is not important, but the number of active developers. Microsoft COULD put a lot of people on those tasks (though their strategy as of late seems to be the opposite) and there's a lot of major corporations that actively develop and patch Linux too. Please don't forget that Linux main market is the server market, just because consumer distros like Ubuntu are slower on the patching doesn't means there's no proper support on the server oriented distros.

 

Do you really think Linux would be so widely used for servers if people were just waiting on good faith volunteers to patch critical security issues? Of course not people like Red Hat, Oracle, etc. have their own staff dedicated to address that.

[DXMember]

will they also throw rocks under the map with low res textures but tons of something that doesn't work well on their competition's cards to fuck their competitor's performance?

 

they could but since it's open source it would be hard to argument why it's there

[i_build_nanosuits]

YES! NO MORE GAMEWORKS. If this is truly open then there is no reason to use gameworks.

reason to use gameworks is MONEY...how much do you think nvidia spend each year on sponsoring games?

Game developpers need money, and so long as nvidia will be willing to give them big bucks to make sure gameworks remains in AAA titles, it will!

 

you don't really think developpers included exclusive gameworks features that are very hard to program just for the fun of it do you?

 

AMD has no money, therefore AMD has no sponsored games...simple as that!

 

#nvidiathewayitsmeanttobeplayedbecausewedecidedso

[patrickjp93]

OpenGL after a decade, Linux, OpenCL, and more.

 

I hope Vulkan takes off, but we've seen very little about it as well. Hopefully big companies and Indie jump on some GPUOpen to at least experiment with it on incoming games next year.

OpenGL isn't that bad tbh. And frankly in some ways it makes more sense than Direct X (Seriously Microsoft, a left-handed coordinate system? Screw you! --Sincerely, the mathematicians and physicists). That said, it needed to be redesigned from the ground up for modern standards.

 

OpenCL should die off already. We have OpenMP. Intel isn't even the primary custodian of it anymore, and soon Intel will be handing off CilkPlus to a standards consortium as well, with Thread Building Blocks to follow in 2018.

[patrickjp93]

reason to use gameworks is MONEY...how much do you think nvidia spend each year on sponsoring games?

Game developpers need money, and so long as nvidia will be willing to give them big bucks to make sure gameworks remains in AAA titles, it will!

 

you don't really think developpers included exclusive gameworks features that are very hard to program just for the fun of it do you?

 

AMD has no money, therefore AMD has no sponsored games...simple as that!

Game Studios have to pay for Gameworks, not the other way around. And actually including Gameworks is not difficult. That's the beauty of it. Game studios do get access to Nvidia devs though.

[dragosudeki]

It doesn't means that it would be any slower either: the amount of affected users is not important, but the number of active developers. Microsoft COULD put a lot of people on those tasks (though their strategy as of late seems to be the opposite) and there's a lot of major corporations that actively develop and patch Linux too. Please don't forget that Linux main market is the server market, just because consumer distros like Ubuntu are slower on the patching doesn't means there's no proper support on the server oriented distros.

 

Do you really think Linux would be so widely used for servers if people were just waiting on good faith volunteers to patch critical security issues? Of course not people like Red Hat, Oracle, etc. have their own staff dedicated to address that.

I think you guys are sorta brushing off some other factors as to why Linux is used. First of all, relying on any proprietary library that you have no control of is such a bad idea. There are so many bugs and issues that the company wouldn't be able to fix due to it belonging to another vendor. The main reason why they go Linux is because they do not have to spend resources building what they need from scratch. They are not on Linux because it gets fixed fast. It is mostly because they have the ability to fix it themselves.

 

The greatest part about AMDOpen (though I still have questions about it) is the fact that companies can make their own modifications to the open source library and sell it for profit.  The reason why Windows is somewhat better than Linux is because MS is paying a team(s) to work on it as a career. This is one problem that open source software gets because it does not have as much incentives to get people to maintain it as an actual job.

[i_build_nanosuits]

Game Studios have to pay for Gameworks, not the other way around. And actually including Gameworks is not difficult. That's the beauty of it. Game studios do get access to Nvidia devs though.

 it must benefits game developers in some way or another otherwise it wouldnt be included in so many games.

[Misanthrope]

I think you guys are sorta brushing off some other factors as to why Linux is used. First of all, relying on any proprietary library that you have no control of is such a bad idea. There are so many bugs and issues that the company wouldn't be able to fix due to it belonging to another vendor. The main reason why they go Linux is because they do not have to spend resources building what they need from scratch. They are not on Linux because it gets fixed fast. It is mostly because they have the ability to fix it themselves.

That what I was trying to get at, so yeah agreed

The greatest part about AMDOpen (though I still have questions about it) is the fact that companies can make their own modifications to the open source library and sell it for profit.  The reason why Windows is somewhat better than Linux is because MS is paying a team(s) to work on it as a career. This is one problem that open source software gets because it does not have as much incentives to get people to maintain it as an actual job.

Not for all cases sure but you just gave the reason above: cheaper to do than to pay license fees and wait for updates and such.

[patrickjp93]

 it must benefits game developers in some way or another otherwise it wouldnt be included in so many games.

Yeah, the game goes from being way behind schedule to being done close to on-time.

[christianled59]

It doesn't means that it would be any slower either: the amount of affected users is not important, but the number of active developers. Microsoft COULD put a lot of people on those tasks (though their strategy as of late seems to be the opposite) and there's a lot of major corporations that actively develop and patch Linux too. Please don't forget that Linux main market is the server market, just because consumer distros like Ubuntu are slower on the patching doesn't means there's no proper support on the server oriented distros.

 

Do you really think Linux would be so widely used for servers if people were just waiting on good faith volunteers to patch critical security issues? Of course not people like Red Hat, Oracle, etc. have their own staff dedicated to address that.

Well yes, I'd have to agree the server side of Linux would be better. It's a fact they basically dominate the server market. I should have specified, I was arguing on the consumer's behalf. Eg win10 or Ubuntu.

[Derangel]

and nvidia has to force it to gain any market share with gameworks and many of those games doesnt turn out very well. in the past it looked like physx was going to be wide spread then nvidia killed it by buying it and locking it down. for something that is worth it for devs to implement it cant just be for a percentage of the market it need to work for the entire market

 

Oh bull. PhysX never showed ANY chance of being wide spread. Before Nvidia bought Ageia PhysX either required you to buy a Physic Processing Unit or use the absolutely terrible CPU based version that was WORSE than Havok at the time. Beyond that Ageia never really had any interest in developing PhysX on it's own, they wanted to be bought out by a bigger company. PhysX had a better chance of being an industry standard when Nvidia picked them up. Hell if AMD had agreed to licence CUDA PhysX probably would be a heck of a lot more widespread now.

 

Game Studios have to pay for Gameworks, not the other way around. And actually including Gameworks is not difficult. That's the beauty of it. Game studios do get access to Nvidia devs though.

 

I believe Nvidia provides Gameworks to developers free of charge. What devs have to pay for is a license for the source code.

[zMeul]

AMD's open source development, specifically their GPU drivers, are in limbo since inception 

[Misanthrope]

AMD's open source development, specifically their GPU drivers, are in limbo since inception

This is an excellent point: AMD is not even close finishing one race and they're announcing their part-taking on another already.

[SurvivorNVL]

This is an excellent point: AMD is not even close finishing one race and they're announcing their part-taking on another already.

At the least we can all be happy in the fact that Radeon Technologies Group is it's own thing.  If AMD spreads too thin and does end up burning up - hopefully Intel picks up Radeon and then we can see a new sunshiney day.

[Samfisher]

This shit again? AMD = open source ALL of the things!....when? TBD.....fine! Mantle is now open source, at the same time we're abandoning the fucking project altogether. Don't believe their lies their "open" shit so far only panned out for Freesync....which was already part of VESA standards. 

 

Adaptive Sync is the VESA standard. FreeSync is AMD's particular use of it on the GPU side.

 

 

AN OPTIONAL standard at that.  It's not required to support Adaptive Sync to get HDMI/DP certification.

[zMeul]

This is an excellent point: AMD is not even close finishing one race and they're announcing their part-taking on another already.

not to mention their recent attempt to revamp the driver package in the Crimson Edition, was a big time failure with fan control issues and clock frequency issues

after all, AMD did fired 5% of their workforce not two months ago - specifically from the software team

[Suika]

I wonder if by "opensource" they mean it will be opensource after it's determined that there's no adoption or future to the technology like every other time.

 

It was a good try, though, AMD.

[Samfisher]

Well yes, I'd have to agree the server side of Linux would be better. It's a fact they basically dominate the server market. I should have specified, I was arguing on the consumer's behalf. Eg win10 or Ubuntu.

Windows and Linux are about equal in the server world.  If you add in Unix-type then yes but Linux?  Nope, not dominating.

[Mister Snow]

As incompetent as AMD's management is, it's either purely for marketing, or to somehow unseat Intel as the Open-Source King to bring back the Linux community.

 

Don't you think that this looks a lot like steam workshop platform? AMD makes a "platform" (essentially just a package of libraries), gives it a jump start on their own and then leaves the rest for some third party developers which are incentivised by the ability to sell their assets which in return drives more adoption, expansion and again, development of said package. You can look at Unity engine and their asset store which also draws a resemblance. I am not saying it will succeed but this really looks to me like something of that sort and is's a good idea.

[don_svetlio]

not to mention their recent attempt to revamp the driver package in the Crimson Edition, was a big time failure with fan control issues and clock frequency issues

after all, AMD did fired 5% of their workforce not two months ago - specifically from the software team

Tried it yesterday - it fixed one of my issues which was my 280 running at 45*C - down to 40*C now with Crimson. No idea why or how

[TechStyle]

Open source huh? More like slow development to me. Why waste money developing this standard when you can wait for someone else to do that and then adopt it. Not to mention the fragmentation that occurs since everyone will want to develop it slightly differently to suit their own needs.

[Guest Kloaked]

If they can pull it off, I'll switch to Radeon cards in a heartbeat because this could potentially mean community performance fixes or better/easier effect mods.

 

YAY! Wait, why the fuck is it called "GPUOpen"? Who the hell names these things? I need to have a word with them and teach them how to name things properly.

 

GPUOpen sounds way better than "FreeSync".

[SkilledRebuilds]

OpenGPU sounds better than GPUOpen IMO.

[Deathroned]

This shit again? AMD = open source ALL of the things!....when? TBD.....fine! Mantle is now open source, at the same time we're abandoning the fucking project altogether. Don't believe their lies their "open" shit so far only panned out for Freesync....which was already part of VESA standards.

Mantle wasnt abandoned it finished dx12 and it was given to the khronos group.

Vesa standard is Adaptive sync jointly developed by amd. Freesync is an amd standard.