Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Former Valve/VOGL Dev: OpenGL Next Could Take 3+ Years

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

  • #21
    As long as it is an API that will be supported and make most -if not all- mfgs happy it doesn't matter if it takes a bit more time to reach consumers.

    Comment


    • #22
      From this phoronix article:
      ...it (GL Next) could take a while before GPU silicon ends up supporting all of its features
      I wish GL Next actually required GL4+ hw, but it looks like it will actually support GL3 class hw (hopefully not older), that's the impression I got from official press-releases, particularly they state GL Next won't be as low level as Mantle.

      So it seems all new (and significantly older) video cards are already fit for GL Next, which is both good and bad.
      Last edited by mark45; 10-09-2014, 02:03 PM.

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by kalrish View Post
        Without considering NVIDIA hardware limitations or whether Mantle is tied to AMD hardware, since the Nouveau Mesa driver is based on Gallium3D, once the Mantle state tracker was added, it would just work.
        That would pretty much make Mantle an abstract API.

        Of course it's all conjecture since none of us really know what Mantle is outside of a few bullet points on some marketing slides.

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by Meteorhead View Post
          That will simply never happen. If that would be acceptable, NV and Intel would already support Mantle. Personally I would not be happy to see OpenGL-Next to be a copy of Mantle. I believe it would be a lot more reasonable if they created an ABI and an API that integrated better with OpenCL. I have abso****inglutely no idea what's the need for OpenGL Compute Shaders, when they have a compute API available that is far superior to something hacked onto a graphics API. The only reason people use GLCS is because it outperforms CL-GL interop. If they'd design an ABI that is more flexible than current interop, and one which outperforms it, (if OpenGL could inherit the SPIR intermediate, if people could link OpenGL shaders with OpenCL kernels) that would make a lot more sense from a Khronos perspective. If single-source shaders could be written with a tool similar to SYCL, graphics and compute merged to C++ in a single-source manner... Khronos has a lot of good technologies. I think it would be wiser if they brought together what they have rather then creating something yet again radically new. Just get rid of the anachronistic stuff, give SVM to graphics (a portable means to implement partially resident textures) and bring it up to a C++ level.
          Hello no to C++ support. That will make it really hard to use OpenGL Next with any other language...

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by Asariati View Post
            Hello no to C++ support. That will make it really hard to use OpenGL Next with any other language...
            Agreed, I want to use OpenGL Next with Rust.

            Comment


            • #26
              Hah, I wonder if anyone's taking bets on the timeframe

              For my project's development this will (hopefully and most likely) have no impact, as it currently requires OpenGL 1.1. I had the idea of having it require 1.0, but in the end decided it's not worth it as pretty much anything supporting 1.0 supports 1.1 as well.

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by godlike_panos View Post
                OpenGL next is moving full speed ahead after AMD giving Khronos group access to Mantle. Mr Geldreich left Valve around that time and that probably implies that he lost his Khronos membership around that time as well. If that is true then he is probably unaware of what happened after AMD's move. With all that said his 3+ estimate is not based on facts but it's a personal opinion based on a incomplete picture.

                OpenGL-next is in heavy development and that is a fact. Everything else concerning Mr Geldreich is an assumption.
                Unless you have a Khronos membership your assumptions are as baseless as you claim Mr. Geldreich's are, don't you think?

                Comment


                • #28
                  3 years is way too long

                  D3D, Metal, Mantle, etc will have evolved and once again lapped OpenGL in that time

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Originally posted by LLStarks View Post
                    3 years is way too long

                    D3D, Metal, Mantle, etc will have evolved and once again lapped OpenGL in that time
                    Multi-vendor / multi-platform:
                    D3D -> Yes / No
                    Metal -> I just don't know
                    Mantle -> No, No (perhaps in the future)
                    Opengl -> Yes / Yes

                    Any game that wants a new api like performance could try with Opengl 4.5, direct state access should give similar overhead improvements, there's some slides from the gdc that are pretty amazing.

                    Khronos need to hurry up now that there's more interest on d3d alternatives or we'll end with all the AAA games being dx only again.

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by godlike_panos View Post
                      OpenGL next is moving full speed ahead after AMD giving Khronos group access to Mantle. Mr Geldreich left Valve around that time and that probably implies that he lost his Khronos membership around that time as well. If that is true then he is probably unaware of what happened after AMD's move. With all that said his 3+ estimate is not based on facts but it's a personal opinion based on a incomplete picture.

                      OpenGL-next is in heavy development and that is a fact. Everything else concerning Mr Geldreich is an assumption.
                      You know, I wrote up a big, deep reply about why I think it's 3 years away from being relevant, but I don't want to get involved in any more GL flame wars. My comment was about vogl and why I think vogl will stay relevant in a post-GL Next world. Basically, GL Next needs a big developer like Valve, Epic, Crytek, etc. to step up to the plate and work very closely with, and push back to, all the GL Next driver teams to keep them honest and down on planet earth. Just like Valve did with the Steam Linux/SteamOS effort. Until the API and new drivers go through the "lense" of having to actually be relied upon by shipping products and real customers it will be a paper tiger.

                      -Rich

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X