Part of the Khronos Group
OpenGL.org

The Industry's Foundation for High Performance Graphics

from games to virtual reality, mobile phones to supercomputers

Page 7 of 19 FirstFirst ... 5678917 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 184

Thread: Official feedback on OpenGL 4.0 thread

  1. #61
    Junior Member Newbie
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1

    Re: Official feedback on OpenGL 4.0 thread

    Question regarding OGL 4 and 3.3. I have a GTX 280, would that support OGL 4 features, or would I just use 3.3. I have heard reports of DX11 features running on a DX10 card, so that's why I ask.

  2. #62
    Junior Member Regular Contributor Heiko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    the Netherlands
    Posts
    170

    Re: Official feedback on OpenGL 4.0 thread

    Quote Originally Posted by th3flyboy
    Question regarding OGL 4 and 3.3. I have a GTX 280, would that support OGL 4 features, or would I just use 3.3. I have heard reports of DX11 features running on a DX10 card, so that's why I ask.
    No OpenGL 4.0 for DirectX 10(.1) class hardware. All functions from OpenGL 4.0 that can run on DirectX 10(.1) hardware are available in OpenGL 3.3. Examples of functions that you cannot use with your hardware are the new tessellator control shaders, these are therefore only found in OpenGL 4.0 (and not in OpenGL 3.3).

  3. #63
    Senior Member OpenGL Lord
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    6,013

    Re: Official feedback on OpenGL 4.0 thread

    And now I'd like to present the most awesome thing in the OpenGL 3.3 specification:

    Quote Originally Posted by The OpenGL 3.3 Specification
    The command

    Code :
        void DrawArraysOneInstance( enum mode, int first,
            sizei count, int instance );

    does not exist in the GL, but is used to describe functionality in the rest of this section. This command constructs a sequence of geometric primitives by transferring...
    Oh, and FYI: glDrawElementsOneInstance also does not exist Are there any other functions in OpenGL that do not exist that the ARB would like to tell us about?

  4. #64
    Advanced Member Frequent Contributor
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Hungary
    Posts
    989

    Re: Official feedback on OpenGL 4.0 thread

    It is funny, but that was my dream that the next release of the standard will include actually two versions: 3.3 for DX10(.1) hardware and 4.0 for DX11. It actually became real! Thanks Khronos!

    Also thanks for GL_ARB_draw_indirect that will enable the writing of fully GPU accelerated game engines and for GL_ARB_shader_subroutine to enable modular shader development. Great work!
    Disclaimer: This is my personal profile. Whatever I write here is my personal opinion and none of my statements or speculations are anyhow related to my employer and as such should not be treated as accurate or valid and in no case should those be considered to represent the opinions of my employer.
    Technical Blog: http://www.rastergrid.com/blog/

  5. #65
    Junior Member Newbie
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    2

    Re: Official feedback on OpenGL 4.0 thread

    How are subroutines different from just having a switch statement calling different function depending on an integer uniform?

  6. #66
    Member Regular Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Czech Republic
    Posts
    317

    Re: Official feedback on OpenGL 4.0 thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Amanieu
    How are subroutines different from just having a switch statement calling different function depending on an integer uniform?
    modularity

  7. #67
    Junior Member Regular Contributor pjcozzi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    196

    Re: Official feedback on OpenGL 4.0 thread

    Are there likely to be 3.4, 3.5, ... releases? For example, when 4.1 comes out, will 4.1 features not requiring GL 4 hardware be put in the a core 3.4 spec? I'm assuming (or at least hope) the answer is yes.

    Long term, wouldn't this get messy after several major GL releases?

    Regards,
    Patrick

  8. #68
    Senior Member OpenGL Lord
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    6,013

    Re: Official feedback on OpenGL 4.0 thread

    They could just do it with core extensions. For example, if they have shader separation, they could just make an ARB_program_separate core extension rather than a point release.

    They didn't make GL 2.2 just so that 2.1 implementations could use VAOs; they just made a VAO extension.

  9. #69
    Member Regular Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Irvine CA
    Posts
    299

    Re: Official feedback on OpenGL 4.0 thread

    I've advocated for having more core releases because it clarifies the work that each implementor must sign on for in order to keep pace. IMO in the past there were too few core releases and way too many vendor extensions, leading to a lot of developer issues. Looking at it in the present tense, it's really no big deal if a modest number of extensions appear on top of 3.3, or if a 3.4 were to appear - neither one would result in a change of supported hardware, assuming your set of relevant vendors were to implement the completeness of either path.

    Looked at another way, say if there are still some couple dozen features on DX10 level hardware that GL3.x has not yet exposed - (I don't think there are, but just for discussion) - there would really be no harm done to have a 3.4 / 3.5 / 3.6 to address those issues over time, as long as you didn't have to wait a couple of years to get there.

    It's been about two releases a year for the last two years, IMO this is a sensible cadence that should continue, in turn reinforcing developer confidence.

    I guess I'm saying that timeliness and cross-vendor coherency exhibit more value to me than the distinction between core and extension. An example of this would be anisotropic filtering. It's not in core due to some long standing IP conflict the details of which escape me. Doesn't matter though, because most implementations have it.

  10. #70
    Advanced Member Frequent Contributor Mars_999's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Sioux Falls, SD, USA
    Posts
    519

    Re: Official feedback on OpenGL 4.0 thread

    I agree with Rob, that two core releases they have now are great. GL3 for DX10 hardware and GL4 for DX11 hardware. And 3.3-3.x anything that isn't covered yet can still be added. Same goes for GL4.0-GL4.x when DX12 hardware comes out in a few years!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •