PDA

View Full Version : Are they...dead?



glfreak
02-28-2012, 01:50 PM
Any idea how long it's before the next GL version? I'm asking this because I noticed a long delay in the release of any D3D updates since the last one. What's going on? Dead season for the APIs?

ZbuffeR
02-28-2012, 02:05 PM
Indeed, the new frontier is mobile. No need for new APIs :)

Alfonse Reinheart
02-28-2012, 02:23 PM
GL ES 3.0 is fairly imminent. And D3D 11.1 will be out with Win8, whenever that is.

GL 4.2 just came out last year at SIGGRAPH. Up until 4.1, we had been getting releases every 6 months, bouncing between SIGGRAPH and GDC. They slowed down to 1 per year for 4.2.

Considering that the next GL version is having its entire specification rewritten (to be better organized), I wouldn't hold my breath for GL 4.3 at GDC.

menzel
02-29-2012, 03:32 AM
I'm also more waiting for ES 3.0, hopefully as a subset of 3.3 with the usual mobile specific limitations (float accuracy, less attributes and fragment shader out required etc.). But a more unified API would be great.
OpenGL 4.2 supports all major features of current GPUs, 4.3 would only be a minor update (better readable spec, query of frag data out names ;-) etc.). For GL5 we will have to wait for the next generation of GPUs (ATIs 7xxx that was just released and NVidias Kepler is anounced for Q1 2012). Those will support MMUs, so we will see some kind of hardware supported mega-texturing (google for 'partially resident textures'). But first we will see extensions for those new features and when they prove to be stable OpenGL 5 can be written. So I wouldn't expect GL 5 to see the light of day this year. Maybe a minor GL 4 update, hopefully an ES update.

Alfonse Reinheart
02-29-2012, 04:03 AM
If ATI already has hardware out with new features, and NVIDIA's right around the door, then we're at least going to see a bunch of NV extensions from GDC or around Kepler's release. The ARB seems to be fairly responsive to these sorts of things, so odds are good of a GL 4.3 to match D3D 11.1, exposing the new features.

menzel
02-29-2012, 08:16 AM
Alfonse: afaik the partially resident texture feature of the 7xxx chips are not exposed in Direct3D and will not be part of 11.1 but an OpenGL extension is planned.
I don't know, how long these things will stay as extensions before they can get adapted to core, but I think I've read somewhere, that the ARB wanted to go to a versioning scheme where a new major number requires newer hardware, so new features of these GPU generations would require GL 5.x.
But numbering aside, I can't wait to even see extensions for these texture management because to me a lot of questions are still open (e.g. can only texture data be swapped or arbitrary buffers as well? what do I get in case of a 'cache miss'? a lower mipmap level and the GPU will fetch the correct part of the texture over the next frames (similar to software megatexturing) or will it stall the pipeline? can I choose? if so, via API globally for a texture of in a shader with different sampling functions?).

Alfonse Reinheart
02-29-2012, 10:43 AM
afaik the partially resident texture feature of the 7xxx chips are not exposed in Direct3D and will not be part of 11.1 but an OpenGL extension is planned.

A proprietary extension (or at best EXT). There will be no standardization of this unless NVIDIA's going to implement it too.

menzel
02-29-2012, 11:45 AM
Yes, I meant a proprietary extension. If we are lucky, an EXT that will be supported by NVidia as well, if not two proprietary extensions with similar features. Going from one or two proprietary extensions to an EXT to an ARB and maybe to core can take time, that's why I wouldn't expect GL5 with such features this year. But maybe NVidia, ATI and the ARB will surprise us with an ARB right from the begining (I'm a dreamer ;-) )?

thokra
03-01-2012, 12:01 AM
#ifdef OT

But maybe NVidia, ATI and the ARB will surprise us with an ARB right from the begining (I'm a dreamer ;-) )?

I think the ELO said it best: Hold on tight to your dreams. ;) I guess the only thing that would really, really stun everyone out there is the news that the ARB decided to come up with a new API.

#endif

What's bothering me is, why should one ask for a new core spec so soon? Is there any serious project or company out there which had time to adopt GL4 in all its glory? I'm not saying the current spec and the features exposed aren't useful, quite the contrary, but it would be nice to have some overview of who is really using them for industry-strength products. For DX11 there are at least some games that explicitly provide a render path - albeit one cannot judge which particular features are really in use. But from what I know, there doesn't seem to be any strong indication that many of the currently exposed features are being used in many meaningful products. Anyone got some info here?

I believe there is nothing wrong with first providing stable extensions first, then assemble the most promising and come up with a new core spec - as long as it doesn't take them as long as from 2.1 to 3.1+.

glfreak
04-11-2012, 10:51 AM
Nothing yet happened. Not even for D3D! I'm wondering what's going on out there? Are they hiding something? No updates, it's like the industry of computer graphics is going dead silently.

Alfonse Reinheart
04-11-2012, 11:26 AM
Why does something not happening on your personal schedule mean that "the industry of computer graphics is going dead silently?" Why should something have happened?


Are they hiding something?

Yes. They're hiding the fact that graphics are good enough for now. They're hiding the fact that between image_load_store and OpenCL, you can pretty much do whatever you want in as fast a way as the hardware allows.

aqnuep
04-11-2012, 08:32 PM
Nothing yet happened. Not even for D3D! I'm wondering what's going on out there? Are they hiding something? No updates, it's like the industry of computer graphics is going dead silently.

Well, both AMD and NVIDIA have released some extensions in the recent past so there is a lot of things going on. Not to mention that other extensions are on the way, at least AMD's virtual texture implementation, GL_AMD_sparse_texture which has been already announced at GDC in March.

Though, somewhat agree with Alfonse that the more flexible features you have (which we have plenty already) the less new features you might need. However, don't forget that both AMD and NVIDIA have released their new GPU generation just in the recent past (Southern Islands in December and Kepler in March) and this may mean even more new extensions.

glfreak
04-12-2012, 08:45 AM
Yes. They're hiding the fact that graphics are good enough for now.

Yes it's and always has been the case, it's something relative. However, the API is not relatively perfect yet. That's why I'm curious why it's taking so long to polish some stuff instead of hacking it, such as the shader calls and needlessly long function names. Or at least do something about the antiquated OpenGL32.DLL. Don't we need a unified context manager that belongs to the OpenGL rather than the ignorant platforms?

Alfonse Reinheart
04-12-2012, 12:12 PM
However, the API is not relatively perfect yet.

None of what you suggested is going to happen. So stop expecting it to and just accept what you have now.

glfreak
04-13-2012, 11:45 AM
None of what you suggested is going to happen.

Your confidence explains a lot. :)

Eosie
04-14-2012, 07:52 AM
Or at least do something about the antiquated OpenGL32.DLL.
OpenGL32.DLL belongs to Microsoft. Ask MS to do something about it, not people on this board.

glfreak
04-16-2012, 09:31 AM
OpenGL32.DLL belongs to Microsoft. Ask MS to do something about it, not people on this board.

I'm not asking you or anyone on this board to do something about it. Take it easy ;)

aqnuep
04-16-2012, 04:05 PM
Don't even bother with OpenGL32.DLL. The whole WGL goes away in WinRT (aka metro API) :)

glfreak
04-18-2012, 09:39 AM
The whole WGL goes away in WinRT (aka metro API)

How to use OpenGL then on WinRT? What're the alternative calls?

Alfonse Reinheart
04-18-2012, 11:52 AM
You don't use OpenGL on WinRT. You can only get OpenGL when using Win32. So OpenGL doesn't exist for applications developed under WinRT.

l_belev
04-19-2012, 12:04 PM
As for d3d, microsoft are busy "conquering" the mobile market and their 3d API is not top priority for them now.

By the way have you noticed that the opengl functions are no longer marked as "obsolete" in their documentation, but instead are labeled "desktop only" - same as the entire win32 api, e.g. CreateWindow or CreateFile

glfreak
04-19-2012, 04:19 PM
As for d3d, microsoft are busy "conquering" the mobile market and their 3d API is not top priority for them now.

This is risky, I don't see this happening, there are already giants in the market. Better they support OpenGL. :)

l_belev
04-20-2012, 06:09 AM
This is risky, I don't see this happening, there are already giants in the market. Better they support OpenGL. :)


I don't see much wisdom in their actions too. The world is changing and they apparently don't know what to do. The billions they have don't seem to be of much help either.

But i don't think they deserve us to mourn for them any more than how much they would mourn for a hypothetical opengl demise :)

glfreak
04-20-2012, 09:38 AM
If I were MS I would take a reasonable path of success at least in the very changing very competitive mobile market, and do support the standard, which is OpenGL.

Unlike the desktop market where there's almost no competition (or minimal), and where consumers of the graphics have no choice, the mobile market on the other hand is completely the opposite. There are already several platforms that are very competitive and very well established. All use the same standard for graphics! Therefore, why would I choose a different approach with yet to be released platform that I'm not sure about its success???
Remember, consumers in the mobile market cannot be forced. They always have a better alternative. :)

Alfonse Reinheart
04-20-2012, 10:20 AM
You're looking at it from the perspective of getting existing mobile developers to port their applications. That's not where Microsoft is coming from.

Microsoft wants to make existing desktop developers port their applications to WinRT. And desktop developers made their peace with D3D long ago. Also, GL ES lacks many features of desktop GL 3.x that make D3D interop much easier: ARB_fragment_coord_conventions, ARB_vertex_array_bgra, and so forth.

So, as a desktop developer with an existing D3D-11 codebase, you could take the hard road of porting to GL ES, or you could take the much simpler roads of just using what you have now.

l_belev
04-21-2012, 05:23 AM
You don't use OpenGL on WinRT. You can only get OpenGL when using Win32. So OpenGL doesn't exist for applications developed under WinRT.

We don't know yet. If you ask Microsoft, you don't use OpenCL on win32 either. Only time will tell.

Not to mention that there is no telling if that WinRT thing will be used by anyone at all, no matter how Microsoft would like the things to be. We will see.

If you remember initially there was no OpenGL on vista. Microsoft were quite bold and arrogant at the time. And what happened? Eventually OpenGL WAS supported on vista. And vista itself was a failure, which cooled their arrogance quite a bit.

Alfonse Reinheart
04-21-2012, 10:43 AM
Not to mention that there is no telling if that WinRT thing will be used by anyone at all

Except that it's already being used by many people. So yeah.


If you remember initially there was no OpenGL on vista. And what happened? Eventually OpenGL WAS supported on vista.

Yes, but they weren't also removing Win32. They are now with Windows on ARM. There's a difference between them deciding not to take out a small bit of already existing functionality and them removing an entire API that just so happens to include that small bit of functionality (ie: OpenGL). The former is them wanting to ditch GL, the latter is them wanting to ditch the thing WGL relies on.

Even moreso because Windows on ARM requires, at the very least, a full recompile due to being on ARM CPUs. So it's not like we're talking about backwards compatibility with existing executable (as was the case with Vista).

Microsoft wants a clean start with Windows on ARM. Maybe they'll add some way to create an OpenGL ES context at some point in the future, and maybe they won't. But if you want to believe that the entire Win32 API will magically manifest itself on Windows on ARM, I can't stop you.

I wouldn't hold my breath though.


And vista itself was a failure

Linux would love to fail like Vista...

It was only a failure in relation to WinXP and Win7.

kRogue
04-23-2012, 04:58 AM
As for portage: smartphones are essentially two categories now really: iOS and Android. The former, unless the most ancient of iPhone, is OpenGL ES2 + Apple extensions and the latter is freaking anything. The former is write mostly only C/C++/Objective-C/Objective-C++ the latter mostly write in Java... you can talk of Android NDK to avoid Java, but it is not very practical as the compile gets targetted for a set of CPU's. Even ignoring the Compiled vs Java thing on Android, GLES2 implementations on Android are all over the place it terms of bugs and what-not... coding workarounds for desktop is small potatoes compared to Android (there are LOTS of very different GPU's and lots of driver revisions for each)... my point is that a code base for any platform is no fun at all to move to Android and hope that it works enough most of the time.

I admit that MS has big courage and/or insanity of not supporting OpenGL ES2 on their mobile platform since that is what folks on mobile are used to.... and that MS is really the distant 3rd by such a HUGE margin... On the other hand, as someone that works with OpenGL ES2 everyday, I can say that I am quite irritated pissed about OpenGL ES2... I am not just talking feature X that is in GL3 or GL4 (as that is a hardware issue too) but the the interface (I've complained of it before: image specification, _API_ limitations associated to shaders, and a few other missing points in the API). I am hoping that the next version of GLES (called Halti or something like that) will sort out the.. issues.

Here is for hoping that at SIGGRAPH 2012
next version of GL is out with the spec "rewrite" GLES3 announced and released

l_belev
04-23-2012, 06:15 AM
I hope they add uniform buffers to GLES3, its about time to get rid of the old woody uniforms that are per-program-object state

kRogue
04-24-2012, 01:37 AM
This is what I find.. amazing and scary:

Tegra Wayne is GL4.1 part for embedded to be shipping is Q3 2012 (http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Nvidia-Tegra-Wayne-Grey-Icera,15407.html)

Insanity.

menzel
04-24-2012, 02:23 AM
Current ImgTec chips are also capable of OpenGL 3.2 and OpenCL. It's about time that OpenGL ES catches up...

kRogue
04-24-2012, 02:55 AM
ImgTec has had a chip for a very, very long time that is GL3: the PowerVR 545.. but the reality of that chip is that outside of the PS-Vita, it was not really, really meant for mobile... all other chip IP's from ImgTec for 3D that are "out" now are GL2 parts (or really old MBX which is GL1 mostly).

ImgTec has their upcoming Rogue GPU, but outside of speed, I have not seen what features are added (though they have that Caustic ray-tracer, no clue where that is in regards to Rogue or other ImgTec GPU's)...

what I find troubling, from a forum community point of view: the OpenGL forum community is far far better than the GLES forum community at Khronos.. I don't really grok why, as on paper one would think that community would be so much more active... but go over to the forums.. it is sad state :(

l_belev
04-24-2012, 04:24 AM
what I find troubling, from a forum community point of view: the OpenGL forum community is far far better than the GLES forum community at Khronos.. I don't really grok why, as on paper one would think that community would be so much more active... but go over to the forums.. it is sad state :(

I would guess the OpenGL community has longer history and richer tradition than GLES. Also for many people GLES is just a version of GL and when they would like to discuss it they go to the "main" GL forum. Anyway we do this now :)

menzel
04-24-2012, 09:38 AM
You're right, I mixed it up with the SGX 543 (iPhone4 and later) and thought that that chip already could do 3.2...
Still, I think common 3.2 capable mobile GPUs are around the corner.

I can understand, that ES questions are discussed here as well as a lot of problems are the same for desktop and ES. Maybe just a subforum here for realy ES specific questions would be enough.
This forum has more active users and as long as an ES forum does not get a critical mass of users, it's probably more promising to post here...