Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Intel Does Hardware Context Support For Ironlake

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Intel Does Hardware Context Support For Ironlake

    Phoronix: Intel Does Hardware Context Support For Ironlake

    Intel's Ironlake hardware may be very old and not nearly as nice as the latest generation Haswell parts, but shipped today was a new patch-set for implementing hardware context support...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTQxMDg

  • #2
    Thanks!! *THUMBS UP*

    Comment


    • #3
      No, 3 years is not “very old”. Glad to at last see something for my processor. What does this improve concretely?

      Comment


      • #4
        Hardware contexts make it much easier to implement transform feedback features, which are necessary for OpenGL 3.0 (and just generally useful!). They also make a few optimizations possible.
        Free Software Developer .:. Mesa and Xorg
        Opinions expressed in these forum posts are my own.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by stqn View Post
          No, 3 years is not “very old”. Glad to at last see something for my processor. What does this improve concretely?
          My thought exactly. I've seen much older hardware and I intend to keep my current one running for at least that long (probably even longer as a secondary box I carry around). Though I don't have anything from this generation, I hope these improvements will also be common when my primary rig becomes that old.

          Adding to this, each new generation of Intel CPU's seems to require a new socket, so there is virually no upgrad path there. Seeing that graphics is the chokepint in my rig (HD4000) I'd definately like to see at least software improvements to it.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Kayden View Post
            Hardware contexts make it much easier to implement transform feedback features, which are necessary for OpenGL 3.0 (and just generally useful!). They also make a few optimizations possible.
            What's still missing for Ironlake to have OpenGL 3.0? I know there's MSAA which the hardware isn't capable of, but besides that, how far is the driver? And how far can the hardware go in terms of GL versions (ignoring MSAA)?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Gusar View Post
              What's still missing for Ironlake to have OpenGL 3.0? I know there's MSAA which the hardware isn't capable of, but besides that, how far is the driver? And how far can the hardware go in terms of GL versions (ignoring MSAA)?
              As far as I know, for OpenGL 3.0 there's two parts left (excluding MSAA):
              - GLSL 1.30 support (interpolation qualifiers and gl_ClipDistance)
              - Transform feedback

              Chris Forbes has patches on the mailing list for handling interpolation qualifiers, and I know he's been working on gl_ClipDistance support. I believe he plans to look into transform feedback eventually, too.

              I haven't thought much past 3.0, really. I believe 3.1 support would be pretty trivial. 3.2 and 3.3 might be possible, but I'm somewhat skeptical. The hardware definitely can't do 4.x.
              Free Software Developer .:. Mesa and Xorg
              Opinions expressed in these forum posts are my own.

              Comment


              • #8
                If you could weasel out of ARB_texture_multisample same as the 3.0 MSAA requirement, everything else in 3.2 might be doable.

                Comment

                Working...
                X