Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 17 of 17

Thread: Intel Starts On Mesa Compute Shaders Support

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    87

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Drago View Post
    What is the reason to implement CS ( GL 4.3 fature ), when tessalation and other type of shaders still missing from Mesa's GL 4.0?
    According to one of the presentatons at the end of the year, there are two main reasons: (1) The asked third-party developers which extensions they most wanted (extensons are "capabilities" so you don't always need to wait for the entirety GL4.3 to be completed to use them) and (2) They can't allocate absolutely everyone to same bit GLSL code missing in GL 4.0 - they start getting in each other's way, and the skill-sets don't necessarily match up.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,479

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Drago View Post
    What is the reason to implement CS ( GL 4.3 fature ), when tessalation and other type of shaders still missing from Mesa's GL 4.0?
    For ogl|es 4, is my guess.

    Also, why not?
    Last edited by liam; 01-10-2014 at 09:25 PM. Reason: Should've read the intermediate posts:)

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,212

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by liam View Post
    For ogl|es 4, is my guess.

    Also, why not?
    There's a reason es4 includes compute shaders and not tess or geometry shaders. It's because they're being used by a lot of people, and generally considered very useful. Almost no one bothers trying to use tesselation shaders, and even geometry shaders aren't extremely widespread even though they've been around for a long time.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    716

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by smitty3268 View Post
    There's a reason es4 includes compute shaders and not tess or geometry shaders. It's because they're being used by a lot of people, and generally considered very useful. Almost no one bothers trying to use tesselation shaders, and even geometry shaders aren't extremely widespread even though they've been around for a long time.
    Not true, and not true.

    Tesselation and geometry are used. Esspecially in games (which generaly driver requirements for 3D anyway).

    But... both are quite power hungry hw. And that's why nobody on mobile would be willing to use it (hence lack of them in OpenGL ES 3.0).

    Do not know how geo, tessel and compute compare. But since all major mobile GPU's already support OpenCL, I guess that it wont be too hard to support Compute. (While geo and tessel may still require some extra hw/power)

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,212

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by przemoli View Post
    Not true, and not true.

    Tesselation and geometry are used. Esspecially in games (which generaly driver requirements for 3D anyway).
    How about some examples of games that use tesselation? Unigine Heaven is a tech demo and doesn't count.

    I'll grant you are mostly correct about geo shaders. Mobile GPUs aren't really fast enough for them to make sense there, given the low power requirements in that market.

    But even when they are used in games, they are mostly used as a minor optional addition, rather than something the engine really takes advantage of. Look at the games that have been ported to linux so far - Metro doesn't use them. Source engine games don't use them.

    There's a lot of engines that do want to use compute shaders. Much, much more than tesselation, which is often more of a checkbox feature just so an engine can list it as a possibility and say they support DX11 features.
    Last edited by smitty3268; 01-11-2014 at 06:08 PM.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    5,272

    Default

    inb4 Crysis and its tesselated underground sea.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Bathurst, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    49

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zanny View Post
    I don't think a Mesa with working radeon opencl would be a huge profit center for AMD.

    I mean a full foss compute stack with beefy hardware like AMD cards would be amazing, but I don't know if the server industry would eat it up.
    Isn't AMD moving away from discrete GPUs and towards an all-APU lineup, even for servers? If so, OpenCL is pretty important in making that work.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •