• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

AMD announces GPUOpen - Open Sourced Gaming Development

Rroff said:
Depends how far you stretch "related" - most of the features used in GameWorks are detailed with sample code in nVidia's developer reference material i.e. https://developer.nvidia.com/gpugems/GPUGems3/gpugems3_pref01.html but that isn't the same as having the exact GameWorks source - but there is pretty much everything there for someone to build such a feature for themselves from ground up if they wished rather than plug it in via GameWorks.
Click to expand...

That's link is fine for someone who wants to learn how to approach the technology but there is no example code there as far as I can see. I'm sure I've seen programming books with more code in them.

Essentially there is no source available for Gameworks unless you specifically join their developer programs so a bit rich for people to claim that GPOpen has similar licensing. I can easily go to the GitHub site and download the actual source for stuff like TressFX. I might try it out myself when I have time.
 
There is loads of code examples and Pseudocode examples - sure its more suited to people who want to learn how to approach the technology but there is everything there to learn how to implement those features (some of it you need to be more part of the developer program to access that I can't just link to directly).

(Sure it doesn't just spoon feed you the exact code to copy and customise or contribute to).
 
Last edited:
Let's face it. Gameworks is simply not open to anyone so pointless trying to make it a trivial matter to go to their website and learn how the technology does thing.
 
As I said depends how much you stretch the related aspect - technically nVidia do publish everything that is required if someone wanted to learn to develop a feature in GameWorks for themselves. No GameWorks itself isn't open.
 
Didn't Mantle fail to take off as expected because DirectX 12 is essentially the same thing and would naturally take over what mantle attempted to start anyway? The benefit being that DX12 advances any GFX card from the last few years, Mantle is AMD only.
 
Mantle essentially became the hardware interface of the vulksn api. They instead stripped out the software side and implemented SPIRv in its place.
 
fs123 said:
Devs can easily use and modify the code for their own use but cannot submit the changes to the original source code in github.
I would have thought the main branch shouldn't be altered unless approved in case it breaks the code or makes it runs slowly. Sounds reasonable to me.

Except the source code for anything Gameworks related is not freely available on a website. Point me in the right direction If I'm wrong.
Click to expand...

I'm not arguing that GPUOpen isn't easier to get the source code for, I'm arguing (correctly) that its not "Open Source"... its a term that AMD supporters love to throw around without actually understanding what it means
 
fs123 said:
That's link is fine for someone who wants to learn how to approach the technology but there is no example code there as far as I can see. I'm sure I've seen programming books with more code in them.

Essentially there is no source available for Gameworks unless you specifically join their developer programs so a bit rich for people to claim that GPOpen has similar licensing. I can easily go to the GitHub site and download the actual source for stuff like TressFX. I might try it out myself when I have time.
Click to expand...

If you want to use Gamesworks you can sign up to the Nvidia Developer program and get the libraries, that way you don;t even have to bother looking at the source code. And you will get much better documentation and support in the process.


Also nvidia used to put most of the source code for GPU Gems on a DVD when you purchased the physical book, don't know if they still do that. That was the incentive to pay $30 for the physical book over the free online version.
 
andybird123 said:
I'm not arguing that GPUOpen isn't easier to get the source code for, I'm arguing (correctly) that its not "Open Source"... its a term that AMD supporters love to throw around without actually understanding what it means
Click to expand...

I think you are viewing open source with too narrow a definition. OpenSource is just a design principle where people can view a projects source code under a certain license and submit improvements to said code. Which AMD is allowing.

But what you are thinking is that every code change will make it into the main branch of a project. Not every project accepts anonymous changes directly into the main branch of code. Many projects will moderate submissions to the main branch before they are added. No different to what AMD will do with GPU Open.

It is how you prevent bad code being added or even malicious code.
 
Andy either you're really being obtuse or worse. Question; do you feel linux is open source?

Gameworks isn't open source no matter how you spin it; Devs have said they don't have access to source code on many occasions; while you can pay to have access; from what been seen; its priced so high no one is doing it.

Here we have access to the source code; you can use it how you see fit; if you got good idea you can submit it to tested to possibly be added to main code. Guess what other open source does exactly this.......Linux ......;) The Base kernel code can on the kernel is changed by by core group controlled by Linus. If you want to branch off; you're more than allowed to; but don't expect your branches to automatically be added without being throughly tested.
 
Indeed, you don't want anyone to be able to just change your codebase, it'd end up like Wikipedia!

I do worry that rather than improve the project, developers (or at least the companies) will take a copy of the code, make any improvements they want and keep their own repository of the code. Lots of developers may do this resulting in lots of branches of the code that don't get combined into the original source repo.
Maybe they won't want to give away secrets, maybe it's just too much hassle to worry about trying to get changes approved.

What happens if Nvidia come along and make some huge changes by providing alternate code paths for their hardware (not small tweaks, effectively duplicating a large number of methods with alternate versions). Will AMD approve this?

This of course assumes that more people use it than use TressFX, otherwise it's a moot point.
 
Ayahuasca said:
Nope, Mantle created DX12 apparently.
Click to expand...

Nope, Mantle did not created DirectX 12!

AMD did not created low level graphics API first, actually Microsoft created Fahrenheit Low Level graphics API first in 1998 that would see both Direct3D and OpenGL merged into unified Scene Graph XSG API but unfortunately SGI was too stubborn not to waited until Microsoft completed developed Fahrenheit Low Level API and lost patience when Microsoft was busy developed DirectX 7 and 8 so SGI decided to abandoned Fahrenheit project and left everything to Microsoft and then Microsoft decided not supported it when DirectX was very popular with games developers.

I wished I had kept Fahrenheit API, whitepaper, FAQ and programming guide after SGI and Microsoft removed all traces of Fahrenheit and XSG. I recalled read very interested whitepaper Microsoft described Fahrenheit Low Level API that will provided console style graphics, very high draw calls, unlimited objects or textures and used very small memory footprints. Sound familar? Yes, had SGI not abandoned project and saw XSG took off replaced both DirectX and OpenGL then we would had been played DirectX 12, Valkan and Mantle games 16 YEARS AGO IN 2000!

http://web.archive.org/web/20080421215948/http://www.directx.com/graphics/fahrenheit.htm
 
Directx 12 may have happened. But I doubt it was going to be the low abstraction version it turned into. Especially with how DX 11.3 popped up with it.
 
LambChop said:
AMD, where ideas go to die. I cant wait till they have 60FPS lol, and this as a feature for buying AMD and most likely branded onto the box as a feature of buying their cards lol.
Click to expand...

I've seen you in a few threads now just fully blown trolling. I hope you get banned.
 
GoogalyMoogaly said:
Indeed, you don't want anyone to be able to just change your codebase, it'd end up like Wikipedia!

I do worry that rather than improve the project, developers (or at least the companies) will take a copy of the code, make any improvements they want and keep their own repository of the code. Lots of developers may do this resulting in lots of branches of the code that don't get combined into the original source repo.
Maybe they won't want to give away secrets, maybe it's just too much hassle to worry about trying to get changes approved.

What happens if Nvidia come along and make some huge changes by providing alternate code paths for their hardware (not small tweaks, effectively duplicating a large number of methods with alternate versions). Will AMD approve this?

This of course assumes that more people use it than use TressFX, otherwise it's a moot point.
Click to expand...

what if medicine had side effects? what if transport lead to accidents?
if we let the what if's dictate what we should do, we wouldn't do anything at all, since everything can be misused by low lives.
the bottom line is the idea is good, can potentialy be Great for PC Gaming, as all good things it need to be regulated, if not by independent organism then by AMD, and they have every right to oversee it.
 
I don't really get the fuss about principles of open source. Does it really even matter. Any developer or random person can freely download those libraries and samples, and freely edit their own versions out of them. Also I'm pretty sure if you come up with something great, you can submit your code for AMD who will see if it's worthy addition.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom