I was just wondering why Aros have NVIDIA drivers and MorphOS ( and OS4 for that matter ) do not ?

Is it because they are on X86 and it's easier to do then or just because red/blue development just do not like NVIDIA? Are these drivers adaptable to MorphOS ?

I am just interested from a technical point of view ...

> I was just wondering why Aros have NVIDIA drivers and
> MorphOS ( and OS4 for that matter ) do not ?

That's because AROS uses Gallium3D and Nouveau while MorphOS and OS4 do not.

> Is it because they are on X86 and it's easier to do then [...]?

No.

> Are these drivers adaptable to MorphOS ?

Some older statements from MorphOS Team members:

https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?topic_id=6522&forum=49&start=6
https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?topic_id=7099&forum=3&start=3

In early August 2010 pega-1 said on pegasosforum.de (rough translation from German):

"Right now I don't see what to get from it. As you know, the MorphOS supported hardware is heavily based on ATI graphics. But Gallium3D doesn't properly support ATI graphics at the moment. AROS using Gallium3D is mainly due to primarily NVidia (and Intel GPU) being supported at the moment and those Noveau Nvidia graphics drivers relying on Gallium3D... Furthermore, it's all very Linux centric. For instance the memory management is left completely to the Linux DRI/DRM memory management. To only wildly copy from Linux is actually not on our agenda right now."

In late August he added (rough translation from German):

"Honestly, I don't understand this whole hype regarding Gallium3D. Whether that's the solution to all 3D problems of Amiga-like operating systems remains to be seen. A driver backend that is for now not seen by some overlying software due to another layer lying inbetween rather won't improve the software interoperability between the systems. [...] We'll evaluate the specific MorphOS 3D driver situation in due time. That process doesn't take several years..."

well I guess I have my answer. I only don't really understand "MorphOS supported hardware is heavily based on ATI graphics" ... how so ?

Quote:

So you claim that it's not easier to do on X86 ? At least I'm unaware of a non X86 AROS port which supports Mesa3D/Gallium/NVidia .....

> So you claim that it's not easier to do on X86 ?

Yes.

> At least I'm unaware of a non X86 AROS port which supports Mesa3D/Gallium/NVidia

"Mesa and gallium have PPC paths already implemented - I think they are used for PPC Macs."
http://amigaworld.net/modules/news/article.php?storyid=5688#76373

If it's there for AROS on x86 and for non-AROS on non-x86 then I conclude that it's not more difficult to do for AROS on non-x86 than for AROS on x86.

Ok, one might conclude that. And there is no doubt that there are some kind of "PPC paths" inside Mesa and Gallium. Still, I'm unable to find a non X86 AROS PPC port that supports it.

> I only don't really understand "MorphOS supported hardware is heavily
> based on ATI graphics" ... how so ?

That's what I didn't understand either. So I responded:

"But that's surely rather effect than cause. To port MorphOS you're selecting exactly those PPC Macs which have either a supported Radeon GPU or an exchangeable graphics card. With Gallium3D that table could be turned."

Unfortunately, he didn't respond to that counter-argument.

> Still, I'm unable to find a non X86 AROS PPC port that supports it.

I cannot find one either. But that doesn't necessarily mean that it would be more difficult to do. It could also just mean that nobody did it for AROS on PPC yet due to lack of request and/or motivation and/or available PPC hardware. As far as I'm aware AROS on PPC generally lags behind AROS on x86.

Well if NVIDIA would be supported more macs could be used without modifications to MorphOS IF the graphics are the only difference...

But on the other hand: it's not that difficult to source a mac with a
Radeon in it, so is it worth it? I guess they better put the effort in the faster Radeons that have 2d support already.

> if NVIDIA would be supported more macs could be used without
> modifications to MorphOS

Adding a driver for nVidia GPUs would qualify as a "modification to MorphOS" in my book ;-)

> it's not that difficult to source a mac with a Radeon in it, so is it worth it?

If MorphOS had nVidia (NV30+) support it could potentially also run on PPC Macs with non-exchangeable NV30+ GPU, i.e. some models of PowerBook G4, iMac G4 and iMac G5.

> I guess they better put the effort in the faster Radeons that have 2d support already.

Gallium3D could also bring (3D) support for Radeon R300+ GPU. PPC Macs with non-exchangeable R300+ GPU include some models of PowerBook G4, iBook G4, eMac and iMac G5. Refer to: http://www.x.org/wiki/GalliumStatus

Installing Picasso96 on you classic AMiga ... was that modifying AMigaOS or just adding something ? It's how you look at it I guess.

Well if all the people that are interested in MorphOS already have the macs with the mentioned GPU... ok. But still if you want to buy a MAC especially for MorphOS ... choice enough while avoiding NVIDIA gpu I think.

There are not very interesting NVidia cards in "Mac World" for PowerPC host.
MorphOS at the moment has a good 3D support for ATI cards; give a look at these tests http://amiga.ikirsector.it/forum/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=13185
It's better to continue to concentrate on ATI 3D (and 2D).
In MorphOS 2.6 there is now also a support for ATI9600/9700; I hope to see in next months:
-1) "speed up" in 3D (as seen in some video about Bigfoot's MacMini, months ago).
-2) the full support 2D of ATI 9800/9700/9600 and the same about the 3D for these cards.
(Note that We have now powerful and very cheap PowerMac G4 supported and other interesting models G4 (MacMini/Emac/Powerbook/Ibook...), and one day if needed, the G5 Systems AGP and PCIe)

((I hope that with the support of very cheap PowerMac G4 (and in some cases very powerful) We' ll have many new users and developers))

regards

[ Edited by Divinity on 2010/10/23 12:47 ]

> Installing Picasso96 on you classic AMiga ... was that modifying AMigaOS
> or just adding something ?

P96 for AmigaOS was a contribution at best, so it had to be added. CGX in MorphOS is an integral part.

> if all the people that are interested in MorphOS already have the macs with
> the mentioned GPU... ok.

Why would it have to be "all"?

> There are not very interesting NVidia cards in "Mac World" for PowerPC host.

I think it's more about PPC Macs with non-exchangeable nVidia GPU rather than nVidia graphics cards. If you consider such PPC Macs as "not very interesting" I'm fine with that though ;-)

> MorphOS at the moment has a good 3D support for ATI cards

Let's constrain that statement to R100/R200 (Radeon 7000 to 9250) :-)

> It's better to continue to concentrate on ATI 3D (and 2D).

Yes. Gallium3D could not only bring nVidia support (NV30+) but also 3D support for R300+.

> I hope to see in next months [...] "speed up" in 3D (as seen in some video
> about Bigfoot's MacMini, months ago).

Yes, demonstrated one year ago. IIRC these new TinyGL drivers were said to come not before the release of MorphOS 3.0 (as in release "3.0", not developer "3.0").

> We have now powerful and very cheap PowerMac G4 supported and
> other interesting models G4 (MacMini/Emac/Powerbook/Ibook...)

PowerBook and iBook? Now? Really? ;-)

@Andreas_Wolf

sure It's more about PPC Macs with non-exchangeable nVidia GPU

yes about range Radeon 7000 to 9250 atm

sure not only Nvidia about Gallium

emm MacMini/Emac/PowerMac atm

Update:

>> I hope to see in next months [...] "speed up" in 3D (as seen in
>> some video about Bigfoot's MacMini, months ago).

> Yes, demonstrated one year ago. IIRC these new
> TinyGL drivers were said to come not before the release of
> MorphOS 3.0 (as in release "3.0", not developer "3.0").

Demonstrated once again and improved, at Amiga Meeting Nord 2010:

http://amition.boingsworld.de/video/bb2010morphos.flv (4:55 - 10:00)

Edit: added relevant time stamps.
Edit2: changed video URL.

[ Edited by Andreas_Wolf 10.05.2012 - 06:21 ]

Nice one! Too bad quality of that video is low :(

Quote:

Interesting to note that one of the presenters (Bigfoot?) mentions a possible release of the updated drivers with an upcoming 2.8 release estimated at "some time in the new year" (NB after a MorphOS 2.7 Powermac-oriented-bugfix release estimated "towards the end of November").

Also, Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory looks awesome!

> one of the presenters (Bigfoot?) mentions a possible release of the updated
> drivers with an upcoming 2.8 release estimated at "some time in the new year"
> (NB after a MorphOS 2.7 Powermac-oriented-bugfix release estimated "towards
> the end of November").

Thanks for your additions. Some more observation as to what was said by the developers:

1. 3D driver for R300* will come soonish, not Gallium3D based. (20:11)
2. PowerBook G4 support will not be released before R300 is supported in 3D (and fully in 2D). (39:48)
3. PCI cards that don't currently work in PowerMac G4 but work in Pegasos (e.g. SATA) are supposed to be supported in PowerMac G4 with MorphOS 2.8. (31:08)

From those points I conclude that PowerBook G4 support will come not until *after* MorphOS 2.8 release.

* The developer mentions that R300 includes up to Radeon X850, which is not true. X850 is R400 based. For a full list of R300 based cards (the highest numbered one being the X1050) go there.

> Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory looks awesome!

I think that was its predecessor RtCW.

Quote:

If I had something to add to your "wise guy" post, I would probably add that supporting R300 up to X850 means that X850 is the last card that uses a compatible CRT/display engine that works with the current Radeon driver. Everyone involved in Radeon driver development is pretty much aware that X850 is R4xx based, so this was more or less some imprecise glitch there ....
X1050 definitely won't work with the current Radeon display driver, though and requires major rework in that area. X850 only requires minor changes.

> supporting R300 up to X850 means that X850 is the last card that uses a
> compatible CRT/display engine that works with the current Radeon driver.

Does that mean in practise that the coming 3D driver for R300 will support the R400 based X850 as well?

> Everyone involved in Radeon driver development is pretty much aware that
> X850 is R4xx based, so this was more or less some imprecise glitch there ....
> X1050 won't work with that and requires major rework in that area. X850 only
> requires minor changes.

Thanks for clarification.

> Too bad quality of that video is low :(

450% more pixels, but some minutes missing from the beginning:

http://www.whbg.de/07%20-%20MorphOS%20Team%20-%20Quake3%20G5-Fork.avi
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-EwQasRtAA

(Note: my aforementioned time stamps are 4:45 fast compared to this higher res video.)


Edit: added Youtube link

[ Edited by Andreas_Wolf 12.11.2011 - 14:06 ]

Quote:

At least by looking at the 3d core changes/enhancements inbetween R3xx to R4xx, this might be some possible scenario.
The only "flawless" target for AGPx8 Radeon X8x0 cards is the PowerMac G5 for now, though (non-availability for MorphOS on G5 put aside). I didn't try to modify a Radeon X8xx card to make it work in a PowerMac G4 yet. For Pegasos2 or Efika (space/mechanical issues unconsidered) it's completely out of the picture. So focus is clearly on supporting most of the R3xx based cards.

>> Does that mean in practise that the coming 3D driver for R300 will
>> support the R400 based X850 as well?

> At least by looking at the 3d core changes/enhancements inbetween
> R3xx to R4xx, this might be some possible scenario.

That sounds nice, and it would be in line with what you said in the video :-)

Thanks Pega-1. That's the impression I got looking at the specs for the R400. Having owned several R3XX based cards, the 800 series just looked like a continuation of that design.

I'm not about to ask about when we could see it. I assume you'll consider R300 3D acceleration first (for the Powerbooks). Its just nice to now we may see eventual support for the last ATI AGP cards that could be used on the hardware we're using (or hope to use in the immediate future)..

I know I've always been able to count on your statements as 100% accurate, so its nice to see you guys have already thought this out.