Originally posted by smitty3268
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Zink OpenGL-On-Vulkan Seeing Some 50~100% FPS Gains
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by rmfx View PostVulkan is really the best thing that happened in graphics over the past 10 years...
Now we can have dxvk and this happening too
- Likes 3
Comment
-
Originally posted by eydee View PostLet's remember it's mostly tested and developed on Intel stuff. 100% improvement means going from 1 fps to 2 fps.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by EmbraceUnity View PostWhat were the previous benchmarks? If Zink used to be three times slower, then now it is only 50% slower. If it used to be 50% slower, now it is up to 25% faster.
Vulkan API is closer to metal so maybe it can be generalized that it will also be less prone to bugs. So Zinc could maybe be a viable solution for drivers that lack "proper" OpenGL implementation, something that is not broken due to bugs.Last edited by curfew; 20 September 2020, 08:58 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by curfew View PostIf you're referring to native OpenGL implementation vs. ZInc, I don't see how Zinc could ever be faster. Native implementations always use the internal graphics card API or instruction set, so when optimized properly, it will also be faster. Zinc is building atop another public API so there must be an overhead of some kind, I would guess something between 10 and 30 % at minimum.
Vulkan API is closer to metal so maybe it can be generalized that it will also be less prone to bugs. So Zinc could maybe be a viable solution for drivers that lack "proper" OpenGL implementation, something that is not broken due to bugs.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by curfew View PostIf you're referring to native OpenGL implementation vs. ZInc, I don't see how Zinc could ever be faster. Native implementations always use the internal graphics card API or instruction set, so when optimized properly, it will also be faster. Zinc is building atop another public API so there must be an overhead of some kind, I would guess something between 10 and 30 % at minimum.
Vulkan API is closer to metal so maybe it can be generalized that it will also be less prone to bugs. So Zinc could maybe be a viable solution for drivers that lack "proper" OpenGL implementation, something that is not broken due to bugs.
I find it plausible that a Vulkan based renderer could outperform a native renderer simply because the Vulkan renderer is based on a much more efficient HW path. Say for instance that a 4 field vector in OpenGL could be fitted to an 8 field vector in Vulkan so that the Vulkan calculations effectively can handle two four-field vectors at the same time. This then becomes twice as fast for some instances.
I have no clue if this is actually the case; just making the point that old APIs on new hardware are not necessarily as fast as on the old hardware.
Comment
-
Originally posted by wertigon View PostNot an expert here, however, OpenGL is a really old api designed for really old hardware. Hardware so old, in fact, it has changed fundamentally once Vulkan was implemented.
Originally posted by wertigon View PostI find it plausible that a Vulkan based renderer could outperform a native renderer simply because the Vulkan renderer is based on a much more efficient HW path. Say for instance that a 4 field vector in OpenGL could be fitted to an 8 field vector in Vulkan so that the Vulkan calculations effectively can handle two four-field vectors at the same time. This then becomes twice as fast for some instances.Last edited by curfew; 20 September 2020, 01:47 PM.
- Likes 1
Comment
Comment