Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Intel's Windows Driver Now Supports OpenGL 4.4, Linux Driver Still With OpenGL 3.3

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

  • Intel's Windows Driver Now Supports OpenGL 4.4, Linux Driver Still With OpenGL 3.3

    Phoronix: Intel's Windows Driver Now Supports OpenGL 4.4, Linux Driver Still With OpenGL 3.3

    The Intel Windows driver is up to supporting the OpenGL 4.4 specification while the company's open-source Linux graphics driver still doesn't yet fully support OpenGL 4.0...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...ows-OpenGL-4.4

  • #2
    Still blocking the OpenGL 4.0 compliance is incomplete GL_ARB_shader_subroutine and GL_ARB_tessellation_shader support.
    At least Dave marked subroutine today as started which is better then not started - well at least finally someone even started working on it .

    http://cgit.freedesktop.org/mesa/mes...421fc035d831f3

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by dungeon View Post
      At least Dave marked subroutine today as started which is better then not started - well at least finally someone even started working on it .

      http://cgit.freedesktop.org/mesa/mes...421fc035d831f3
      Seems airlied is now officially everyone's hero

      Comment


      • #4
        I know I sound like a broken record on this, but isn't it Intel's responsibility to implement 4.4 support on Linux?

        Why is Intel not fulfilling its obligations in a timely manner? And why does the market not hold Intel's feet to the fire?

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by johnc View Post
          Why is Intel not fulfilling its obligations in a timely manner?
          Companies to what they need to do, if it doesn't hurt their revenues then they don't do it.
          I know some companies to more than they're incentivised to do, but there's no such thing as an "obligation" or "responsibility"

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by johnc View Post
            I know I sound like a broken record on this, but isn't it Intel's responsibility to implement 4.4 support on Linux?

            Why is Intel not fulfilling its obligations in a timely manner? And why does the market not hold Intel's feet to the fire?
            Almost no-one has any particular use for GL4 on Intel cards under Linux.
            GL3 is fine for big companies' spreadsheets/browsers, or for most games that will actually run acceptably on an IGP. The market segments who do need GL4 support (3D CAD/modelling/animation, serious gamers/game devs) are using dedicated cards from AMD or Nvidia.

            On Windows, sheer numbers make it worthwhile to add the support - it'll only really help a small fraction of the market, but that's a lot of people in real terms - and PC manufacturers want to advertise shiny features. Linux has 1-2% of the user base, and only one large manufacturer sells Linux PCs, so the same amount of work will get Intel far less benefits.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by johnc View Post
              I know I sound like a broken record on this, but isn't it Intel's responsibility to implement 4.4 support on Linux?

              Why is Intel not fulfilling its obligations in a timely manner? And why does the market not hold Intel's feet to the fire?
              Well with this but not yet official OpenGL 4.4 windows support, intel lagging (after the specs) only by about 2 years... it is not unusual that mesa drivers lag for about 4-5 years

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by dungeon View Post
                mesa drivers lag for about 4-5 years
                There has been quite a lot of progress in the later versions of OpenGL, so it looks as though the general progress is at least keeping up with new releases of OpenGL. We'll need to see how Vulcan pans out, of course...

                ...but in general, OpenGL progress is like pulling teeth. It's unusual for Linux not to be at the cutting edge of technology - I'd usually be expecting Khronos to be playing catch up with MESA.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Well, that is what you get from using the worst possible approach to software development: having different teams work on exactly the same software just on different platforms.

                  Smart vendors have one team with platform specialists taking care of the platform integration points.

                  But it is a good example that shows how dysfunctional big companies can get. They needlessly waste resources on a high scale but have become incapable of changing trajectory.

                  Cheers,
                  _

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by OneTimeShot View Post
                    There has been quite a lot of progress in the later versions of OpenGL, so it looks as though the general progress is at least keeping up with new releases of OpenGL. We'll need to see how Vulcan pans out, of course...

                    ...but in general, OpenGL progress is like pulling teeth. It's unusual for Linux not to be at the cutting edge of technology - I'd usually be expecting Khronos to be playing catch up with MESA.
                    Yeah positive thinking like that while generaly the best and healty is rarely true ... i tried to draw exclamation based on how it is now and had been earlier, that is what i expect...

                    But yeah i know expectation beside that to me real side, can be pessimistic or optimistic .

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X