Hello, what do you think of Nvidia’s new product GeForce4? I was told it was engineered to work with Direct3D, but would it work well with OpenGL?
Uhm… hello? … you’re talking about NVIDIA… the one and only company on this planet having the best OpenGL support (thumbs up!), and you’re asking if it’d work well with OpenGL!!!
[This message has been edited by richardve (edited 02-20-2002).]
Bah, a driver without WGL_ARB_render_texture is not complete.
Of course GF4 will work GREAT in OpenGL.
But that´s in NO WAY a question for the advanced OpenGL forum!
During the last days quite a few questions were posted here, that don´t need to be posted in the advanced forum … it´s really annoying 
.
@Humus:
I guess we will VERY soon see a NVIDIA driver, that supports: WGL_ARB_render_texture 
.
Diapolo
[This message has been edited by Diapolo (edited 02-20-2002).]
Yes, you’re right, I should have posted my request on the beginners forum.
Anyway, thanks a lot for answering so quick!
Originally posted by Diapolo:
@Humus:
I guess we will VERY soon see a NVIDIA driver, that supports: WGL_ARB_render_texture
I sure hope you’re right
Yes, the next driver update will support WGL_ARB_render_texture, WGL_NV_render_texture_rectangle, WGL_NV_render_depth_texture,
GL_NV_depth_clamp, GL_NV_occlusion_query, GL_HP_occlusion_test, GL_NV_point_sprite, GL_NV_texture_shader3.
These extension specs should be posted on the developer.nvidia.com in the next day or so.
Thanks -
Cass
Thanks for your reply cass .
Will all these extensions be hw accelerated on GF3 or are some of them GF4 only?
What about GL_NV_vertex_program1_1?
Diapolo
Most of the new extensions will be accelerated on GeForce3. Texture shader 3 is GeForce4 Ti only.
The new extension specs will be posted to the web this evening.
Thanks -
Cass
Originally posted by cass:
Yes, the next driver update will support
WGL_ARB_render_texture,
wasnt render to texture ‘just around the corner’ a year ago
Originally posted by cass:
[b]
Most of the new extensions will be accelerated on GeForce3. Texture shader 3 is GeForce4 Ti only.
The new extension specs will be posted to the web this evening.
Thanks -
Cass[/b]
LIES!!! It’s 10:00PM here, and it still hasn’t been posted!
Perhaps I´m dreaming, because it´s 5 o´clock in the morning here in germany, but I swear I saw the new extensions listed on this page (http://developer.nvidia.com/view.asp?IO=nvidia_opengl_specs) and the new PDF file for download, but after I refreshed the browser window, the update was gone and the old version was there again?
Guess they are working on the page, at the moment .
Diapolo
Originally posted by Diapolo:
[b]Perhaps I´m dreaming, because it´s 5 o´clock in the morning here in germany, but I swear I saw the new extensions listed on this page (http://developer.nvidia.com/view.asp?IO=nvidia_opengl_specs) and the new PDF file for download, but after I refreshed the browser window, the update was gone and the old version was there again?
Guess they are working on the page, at the moment
Diapolo[/b]
LOL, I just got the same!
I have to agree, NVIDIA has outstanding OpenGL support IMHO.
The issue of D3D vs OpenGL is an interesting one when it comes to hardware design. Much of this is politics and PR guff. Every IHV needs to come out and say “3 bags full” to stroke Microsoft and to sell cards, but we know that DX8.1 is out and DX9 is not here yet. OpenGL is the only way to expose new features in the mean time. In addition it’s the only way for a vendor to release new features without signing in blood with Microsoft. The ARB may be slow but an IHV needn’t wait on the ARB. With D3D they not only have to wait on Microsoft, they have to persuade them, and that’s IF there’s a handy DX release you’re onboard with.
Who knows what Microsoft is demanding from IHVs in exchange for inclusion in DX9. It can’t be pleasant based on the stories of friction that leaked to the press.
Microsoft seems to play favourites on various releases, perhaps they pick the underdog or maybe other factors motivate them, but the massaging of APIs to meet 3D hardware design as envisioned by the real experts at NVIDIA, ATI & elsewhere is not what drives graphics innovation. D3D is a vehicle for Microsoft control and nothing else, I suspect the more intelligent people in the IHVs realize this.
i hope depth_clamp will be available for gf2mx, too…
The depth_clamp extension is certainly useful but it won’t make implementing shadow volumes a piece of cake. There’s still one “hard” case that nobody seems to worry about and that’s the problem of lights too close to occluders. This requires clipping the shadow volumes ( not that difficult but moderately expensive ).
[This message has been edited by PH (edited 02-23-2002).]
hm… since when? any documents about this?
Since always . One of the papers/presentations on NVIDIA’s site briefly mentions this. I don’t remember exactly which one, but all the documents there contain some important details that are easily missed.
hm… never heard of this. you mean if i’m near with a lightsource to an object that expands shadowvolumes i get errors?
The closer a light is to a surface, the farther you need to extend the silhouette quads and back capping triangles. This paper mentions the clipping required,
http://developer.nvidia.com/view.asp?IO=cedec_stencil