Skip navigation
Noel Carboni 23,496 posts
Dec 23, 2006
Currently Being Moderated

What Are The Conditions that Make OpenCL Unavailable?

May 16, 2012 2:22 PM

Up to 2 days ago I had ATI Catalyst 12.2 installed. I was able to check all the boxes in the Advanced Graphics Processor Settings dialog and they stayed set. Specifically, I had [ ] Use OpenCL set and Photoshop CS6 worked very well.

 

Because I need to know about the quality of newer drivers for my own product development, I upgraded my ATI driver suite to the current version - Catalyst 12.4.

 

Unfortunately, this caused new problems I hadn't had before - specifically a number of GPU-accelerated features didn't work, such as Oil Paint, which would appear to try to start then just exit a split second later.  And with Catalyst 12.4 the [ ] Use OpenCL setting became unavailable (grayed-out).

 

With my own testing done, I decided to completely uninstall the ATI Catalyst 12.4 suite, and drop back to Catalyst 12.2.

 

This was a simple matter of uninstalling everything AMD then rebooting (with the Windows driver), then installing Catalyst 12.2. That went smoothly.

 

However, now I still do not find the [ ] Use OpenCL box has become available again - it's grayed out:

 

OpenCLUnavailable.jpg

 

I'm pretty sure there are no remnants from the 12.4 drivers left on my system (though there's a possibility I could have missed something), and everything from the 12.2 set installed successfully, so the question is this:

 

Did Photoshop sense something about the 12.4 driver set, then set some kind of permanent "No OpenCL" flag in its own configuration settings?

 

 

Here's my system info with the 12.2 drivers installed. Note the "OpenCL: Unavailable" entry.

 

http://Noel.ProDigitalSoftware.com/ForumPosts/SystemInfo.txt

 

Note that all my GPU-accelerated features seem to work...  Oil Paint works and is plenty fast, the various Blur tools work nice and fast, I can do 3D rendering (though there's one small glitch I've had since Photoshop CS6 was released where occasionally it becomes unresponsive for a few seconds at a time while doing 3D work).  But it does finally respond.

 

-Noel

 
Replies
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 16, 2012 7:28 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    Noel and I have been carrying on an e-mail conversation about 12.4 so I decided to pop in here.

     

    Noel, I do not have C:\Windows\SysWOW64\amdocl.dll, but I do have C:\Windows\System32\amdocl64.dll.

     

    I don't know what to make of it. I Googled C:\Windows\SysWOW64\amdocl.dll and found an item in the AMD developers Forum :http://devgurus.amd.com/thread/154570, concerning Open CL crashes.

     

    I didn't find (quickly, anyway) anything concerning it's presence or absence in a specific installation, so I wonder if the computer is checked for particulars when an update/grade is requested.

     

    Open CL was indicated in a PS6 crash which Chris Cox fingered when I filed  in CS6 Forum. DxO also had issues with Open CL, running Catalyst 12.3, but appear to have been fixed with 12.4.

     

    Perhaps that WOW64\amdocl.dll is not supposed to be there. You might want to test it without that .dll.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 16, 2012 10:34 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    No, Open CL is grayed out. I thought about it right after clicking reply. So I renamed amdocl64.dll, but still, CL is grayed out.. So I put it back.

     

    Edit: I also removed it from System 32; still grayed out

     

    Message was edited by: Hudechrome

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 17, 2012 8:13 AM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    What you say is correct about what controls what. I removed, again, "C:\Windows\System32\amdocl64.dll" from system 32 folder and sure enough, CL on the 64 bit version is grayed out. Put it back and it runs.

     

    This to me is weird. But that may simply be my ignorance about what controls what. I was curious about the "amdocl64.dll" designation when I saw it.

     

    How is it that dlls in system 32, which has been around since Columbus was a midshipman, now controls a 64 bit app, while dlls in WOW64 which hasn't, controls the 32 bit app?

     

    The mind boggles. I gotta go make some coffee before.....

     

    Message was edited by: Hudechrome

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 17, 2012 9:02 AM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    I never used the word magic.

     

    I figured the first part was likely; as you say, all the OS stuff belongs there.

     

    I would think that WOW64 should be a title that indicates the name of a folder for the 32 bit code, maybe simply 32 bit stuff. But even more importantly, why is the major folder for 64 bit OS code still labelled Sys32.?

     

    Again, the lack of clarity boggles the mind. I do recall  considerable consternation over this topsy turvy designation when we were testing the app at Intel across 32 and 64 bit platforms.

     

    This isn't the only place where an "Alice in Wonderland" up is down situation occurs. Ask me someday about similarities in the use of MAC addresses!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 17, 2012 11:33 AM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    Noel Carboni wrote:

     

    Hudechrome wrote:

     

    why is the major folder for 64 bit OS code still labelled Sys32.?

     

    That's what I was attempting to answer re: the history lesson.  It was System32 when 32 bit Windows came out, and so to try to minimize source code changes for the zillions of programs that just "know" where the system subfolder is (i.e., with hard-coded paths), they left it that way for the 64 bit OS.  It's as simple as that.  I can almost imagine them trying it another way, then running into problem after problem then finally giving up.

     

    As I did a lot of my career in developing data communications products I know quite a lot about MAC addressing.  I also know a lot of decisions are made on MAC addresses that shouldn't be!

     

    -Noel

    My question was rhetorical, you did answer it.

     

    I also figured you had been through the MAC address nonsense yourself!

     

    C'est la vie!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 17, 2012 1:59 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    Yeah, I always set my router to a machine's MAC address.  Comcast pulls the same sort of B.S.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 17, 2012 4:23 PM   in reply to Chris Cox

    What does that do to security? Having a common MAC address makes me a bit concerned.

     

    Is the difference only a speed advantage? Also, does it apply to DSL a la phone lines like CenturyLink?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 17, 2012 4:52 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    Noel Carboni wrote:

     

    But it's not an unsolvable mystery - do you get the advertised speed when you run an internet speed test?

     

    -Noel

    No, I get better than 2X advertised. It's running 3.4Mbsec, and I am on the 1.5 M plan.

     

    Next level is 5M, for 5 bucks extra. makes me wonder if it's worth it. 5M could be the limit because I know I am near the limit for the repeater in my location. It would be nice if it actually worked out to 10M!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 21, 2012 8:30 AM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    It looks like the weak link is AMD's installer-not installing 32-bit support as well as 64-bit support in a 64-bit environment.  It also depends on your OS (My laptop running Windows 8 Consumer Preview doesn't have any OpenCL support at all).

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 22, 2012 3:18 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    Although not specific to Photoshop, you may find this article interesting.

     

    http://www.anandtech.com/show/5847/answered-by-the-experts-heterogeneo us-and-gpu-compute-with-amds-manju-hegde/2

     

    Scroll down to the section discussing Open CL and the new WinZip. It would seem that while Open CL is opened, the implementation depends upon the graphics processor being used. The article suggests code is not easily transportable between devices.

     

    BTW, I installed the new WinZip. Open CL, even running on my lowly 4650 class card, certainly makes a big difference.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 22, 2012 3:55 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    Weell, I just opened CS6, opened a file, checked to be sure CL is checked and ran Liquify, using 12.4. Ran just fine no delay or brush drag.

     

    Never say never!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 22, 2012 4:04 PM   in reply to Hudechrome

    Ok, I turned CL off ran the same test and Liquify ran just as well.

     

    So I don't know why it won't come up for you, Noel.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 22, 2012 6:20 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    A few days ago! That's an eternity in software!

     

    I don't get then, what you meant when you said "Liquify wouldn't even come up."

     

    I already know that the CL settung isn't sticky.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 22, 2012 9:45 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    Ah so!

     

    I wonder about your 12.4 download. Or perhaps there are variations between cards by virtue of the manufacturer. It seems strange, to say the least!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 2, 2012 4:23 AM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    Per the suggestion in the this thread, I deleted these files:

     

    C:\Windows\SysWOW64\amdocl.dll

    C:\Windows\System32\amdocl64.dll

     

    I uninstalled Catalyst 12.4.

    I installed Catalyst 12.2. (OpenCL still grayed out in Photoshop CS6 64-bit)

    I re-installed Catalyst 12.4. (Now OpenCL can be enabled.)

     

    Having OpenCL enabled is a big advantage for certain Photoshop filters.

    For example, with OpenCL enabled, the Iris Blur with 500 px renders in 57 sec instead of 200 sec (Radeon HD 5770).

     

    Under OS X, the difference is even more dramatic. The Radeon 5770 renders the Iris Blur in 20 sec instead of 139 sec.

     
    |
    Mark as:

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (1)

Answers + Points = Status

  • 10 points awarded for Correct Answers
  • 5 points awarded for Helpful Answers
  • 10,000+ points
  • 1,001-10,000 points
  • 501-1,000 points
  • 5-500 points