I just re-flashed my 9800XT with a Mac bios and I noticed that MorphOS still lists it as a 9800Pro with only 128MB of memory.

I can understand the 9800Pro (how would the OS know the difference), but doesn't MorphOS support the full 256MB of VRAM?

> doesn't MorphOS support the full 256MB of VRAM?

https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=11&topic_id=7339&start=34

Thanks Andreas.

Hopefully, future revisions will change this limitation.

Frank mentioned last December that he and his two partners in this were about to meet to resume work on the R300 drivers.

It may not make 3.0, but I'm sure we'll see improvements in the future.

I did not check Andreas_Wolfe's link, but I am guessing that it leads to a discussion about the memory having to be seen my MorphOS as one contiguous block for MorphOS to see all 256mb of VRAM. Otherwise it will only see one of the two 128mb blocks of VRAM.

Something like that, from what I remember of the discussion. I guess there are only a few 256mb VRAM video cards that have their memory setup in a way that can all be seen (and used) by MorphOS.

I am not sure you can tell which ones will work, until you actually try them in a MorphOS computer.

> Hopefully, future revisions will change this limitation.

Yes, "it should work ok for the next update" very much sounds this way.

> I am guessing that it leads to a discussion about the memory
> having to be seen my MorphOS as one contiguous block for MorphOS
> to see all 256mb of VRAM. Otherwise it will only see one of the
> two 128mb blocks of VRAM.

No, it's about a limitation pega-1 put into the Radeon 9600/9800 drivers on purpose.

> I guess there are only a few 256mb VRAM video cards that have their
> memory setup in a way that can all be seen (and used) by MorphOS.

All Radeon 9600/9800 cards with 256 MiB VRAM have it setup in one contiguous block, AFAIK. It's probably other Radeon cards you're thinking about here.

Andreas_Wolf,
Quote:

That's what I got out of that.
As far as i know, only the Radeon 9000 has two distinct memory segments.

And with only 2D support, 128MB probably is more then adequate.

> As far as i know, only the Radeon 9000 has two distinct memory
> segments.

I don't know about the Radeon 9000, but I'm sure most Radeon 92x0 cards with 256 MiB VRAM have it in two segments.

Good point. That was what I was thinking about.
I have seen 256MB 9000 based cards, but they're not common.

I would assume they'd have the same limitation as the 9200 and 9250.

@Andreas_Wolf,

Thanks for the correction.

Off Topic Warning: I noticed on the AW.net forum site that when I have my viewing preferences set to view the newest posts first (reading the forums backwards from newest to oldest posts), links to posts on forums elsewhere in the site don't work as they are intended, as the numbering of the posts get screwed up and the links then point to the wrong post in that thread. I am wondering if the same problem occurs here and if I change my preferences here to read from the oldest post to the newest post here, if it will make it easier for me to find the messages you are trying to link to, to provide the answer to any question being asked?

If your links don't immediately lead me to a direct answer to the question, or point of view that you are trying to refer to, I give up and do not search further to try to figure out what you are linking to. This and the occasional link to another thread that only has a link to another thread or another website, that eventually has the answer, or point of view, has lead me to just start ignoring your links to other threads as an answer to any question or point of view.

Not sure I want to change my order of viewing forum posts, or just continue ignoring your links as answers to questions?

This is just FYI, and not a judgment about your posting style, in case you ever wondered why I don't reply to, or seem to understand your response links. It is probably because I have ignored following your provided links.

I will try changing my preferences to see if it makes any difference, just so I will know if that is what the problem has been in the past. None of the above are meant as questions for you to answer, I am just writing to myself and for the benefit of anyone else who has trouble finding the right post containing an answer, when they click on one of the links that you provide.

[ Edited by amigadave 03.03.2012 - 16:52 ]

> I am wondering if the same problem occurs here and if I change my
> preferences here to read from the oldest post to the newest post
> here, if it will make it easier for me to find the messages you are
> trying to link to, to provide the answer to any question being asked?

Yes, it will.

> Not sure I want to change my order of viewing forum posts,
> or just continue ignoring your links as answers to questions?

I don't care. Do as you like. It's your decision really.

> None of the above are meant as questions for you to answer

I answered anyway ;-)

Further information (for use with old-to-new order):

https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?topic_id=7183&forum=3&start=232
https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?topic_id=8214&forum=11&start=3 (bottom of the posting)