• 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

There's also philosophical differences that can stop code from making it in. Like they may want all submissions to do things a certain way to not break the future codebase.
 
tommybhoy said:

NIXXES/Crystal Dynamics

That'll be two less players now.:p
Click to expand...

I might be missing something...but the only feature that nvidia seem to have added is HBAO+, as all the other features in that video are normal PC stuff.

I would also take a guess that the reason the hair was not mentioned in the video was that its still using a form of AMD TressFx

bit of a 1 all draw?
 
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.
Click to expand...

This what I see will happen in the vast majority of cases, it might be open source but still need AMD to constantly update and drive/market it with resources Im not sure they have atm.

I relay hope GPU Open swims and not sink like few other ATI/AMD initiatives of the past.
 
Dygaza said:
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.
Click to expand...

The fuss is because it's AMD and the rival fans are nitpicking on what open source should be. Anyone who has ever written any bit of code knows that the main branch must not be altered and possibly corrupted by any random code submission. If it was then subsequent downloaders of the code would not be getting the original.
 
andybird123 said:
That's not how open source works, you cant just submit code changes without any review and testing going on, but you also don't have licence terms that completely block people from submitting ideas.
Click to expand...

Well open source was intended to be more like that where everyone improves the code and shares it, but what tends to happen is the code is released under a license and then changes are released as a fork.
Hopefully this will be closer to the idea of everyone being able to submit changes to the main repo (in a branch) and then submit a pull request (I think that's typically how github works) with AMD (or trusted partners) as the only people that can merge these requests.
 
fs123 said:
The fuss is because it's AMD and the rival fans are nitpicking on what open source should be. Anyone who has ever written any bit of code knows that the main branch must not be altered and possibly corrupted by any random code submission. If it was then subsequent downloaders of the code would not be getting the original.
Click to expand...

Nope. Obviously no open source project would allow random code submission. Nice straw man though.
 
opethdisciple said:
This sort of thing, relies on there being other companies on-board.

Who out of the big players in the industry are getting involved with this with AMD?
Click to expand...

Some developers might take a look at the code, might even use it has a place holder which then actually just gets modified and extended to suit their needs - but they wont submit the code back to AMD, in part AMD's licensing is preventing them even doing that as Andy points out.Moreover, developers have never shared code in the past unless they are selling the engine. Any modifications and extensions will be the developers value-add and IP, they wont want to give that away for free.

This is really where gamesowrks is better because the develop asks Nvidia for a feature or modification, Nvidia makes the changes and gets to keep the IP. Nvidia then shares the improvements with all other developers. Hairworks had a lot of modification and extensions for The Witcher 3, now all of those improvements are available to every developer without any extra cost or licensing complexity.


hat might happen with GPUOpen is something like the Unity developers heavily incorporate it so there is an active community working on a completely separate branch. That is probably the best outcome.
 
I hope it goes well, really like to see AMD being open source, developer friendly and industry friendly but hope it's supported well and doesn't end with (as seen in forums) a bunch of angry people supporting the closed methods and leaving us with a less open industry.
 
Insanties_birth said:
I hope it goes well, really like to see AMD being open source, developer friendly and industry friendly but hope it's supported well and doesn't end with (as seen in forums) a bunch of angry people supporting the closed methods and leaving us with a less open industry.
Click to expand...

You do realize most industries are closed, and most software is closed source. You are almost certainly writing the above post form a closed source operating system, quite possibly form a closed source browser, using closed source hardware, supported by closed source drivers, compiled on a closed source compiler.

Nvidia is a big supporter of open source, their OpenGL support has been far superior to AMD's. The president of the Khronous group that oversees the development of open source royalty free software like openGL and Vulkan APIs is none other than Nvidia vice-president Neil Trevett.
 
I have not had a chance to look at this yet, but, already it's starting to look like some people are trying to redefine what this is so they can market Nvidia as the better solution.
 
humbug said:
I have not had a chance to look at this yet, but, already it's starting to look like some people are trying to redefine what this is so they can market Nvidia as the better solution.
Click to expand...

The usual suspects as well. What's even worse is that some like to pretend they aren't fanboys and are just 'telling it like it is', fighting against this forums AMD bias etc etc. They might even tell you they've had an AMD card in the past! In reality nearly every post of theirs is either attacking AMD or defending Nvidia again and again and again.

Back on topic, this is hopefully a good thing, although I can see the points that it might not get the developer take up needed to make it widespread. Money talks unfortunately.
 
Last edited:
Klo said:
The usual suspects as well. What's even worse is that some like to pretend they aren't fanboys and are just 'telling it like it is', fighting against this forums AMD bias etc etc. They might even tell you they've had an AMD card in the past! In reality nearly every post of theirs is either attacking AMD or defending Nvidia again and again and again.

Back on topic, this is hopefully a good thing, although I can see the points that it might not get the developer take up needed to make it widespread. Money talks unfortunately.
Click to expand...

In fairness this happens the other way too, one lot are as bad as the other.

It's an interesting idea, but we're gonna need to wait a while before we can tell if it 'works'.
 
D.P. said:
Nvidia is a big supporter of open source, their OpenGL support has been far superior to AMD's. The president of the Khronous group that oversees the development of open source royalty free software like openGL and Vulkan APIs is none other than Nvidia vice-president Neil Trevett.
Click to expand...

OpenGL is a major mess though. The only reason Nvidia is in a better position is because of how devs in earlier times happened to use their hardware and wrote OpenGL methods that worked well with Nvidia drivers. this then carried on and made things worse overall for everyone.

AMD's OpenGL drivers are closer to the actual spec whereas Nvidia uses a lot of extensions and recommends their use.

But at the end of the day the main problem is that there is too much legacy and a major lack of conformance testing.

Vulkan brings an entire stack of conformance testing with the API as well as having debugging through the entire driver stack which you can enable when developing code.

The only opengl that has any real good conformance is OpenGL ES. and i believe the drivers run well on the majority of implementations for it. it just happens to be that hardly any pc games are written in OpenGL ES. But opengl ES 3.1 could change that as it adopted many needed features for writing AAA games.
 
Last edited:
D.P AMD are also on the board at Khronous, what's your point in citing an nvidia VP?
It looks like you are saying because nvidia have their members on the board they have the right to preferential treatment, nvidia in various ways demanding special treatment is an accusation laid against them regulary, it's those argument's you vehemently defend as an untruth, are you now admitting such behaviour is indeed something that nvidia engadge in?
 
humbug said:
D.P AMD are also on the board at Khronous, what's your point in citing an nvidia VP?
It looks like you are saying because nvidia have their members on the board they have the right to preferential treatment, nvidia in various ways demanding special treatment is an accusation laid against them regulary, it's those argument's you vehemently defend as an untruth, are you now admitting such behaviour is indeed something that nvidia engadge in?
Click to expand...

Really? That's what you took from what he said?

I just thought he was saying that Nvidia supported open source stuff, such as the stuff produced by Khronos and even have employees that hold important positions in the organisation.
 
GoogalyMoogaly said:
Really? That's what you took from what he said?

I just thought he was saying that Nvidia supported open source stuff, such as the stuff produced by Khronos and even have employees that hold important positions in the organisation.
Click to expand...



Following a sentace claim of superior nvidia support in ogl.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom