• Advertisement
Sign in to follow this  

OpenGL indices per attribute impossible?

This topic is 4433 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

I've been using VBOs to store (for the time being) just indices and vertex data, and have decided to add vertex colors into the mix. I went back and took a look at how to setup glColorPointer and then realized that the indicies that I would be passing to glDrawElements only represent the index into both arrays, not an individual index for vertex and color separately! This means that a large number of vertices (and colors) will have to be duplicated, because I cannot index through both arrays with different indicies per vertex. For example, a simple cube with only 8 vertices where each face had a different color would end up requiring 8*6=48 vertices (even though the actual vertex positions are the same) because the color table requires different values for each vertex. [ Edit: Actually not 48, but 24. See my reply below. ] Sorry, I come from a GameCube background where we were able to do this. :) Is there something I'm overlooking, or perhaps an extension which provides this functionality? Or is this just impossible under OpenGL? (I'd also like to know if it's possible or not under DirectX if anyone else out there knows the answer.) [Edited by - bpoint on November 30, 2005 3:48:07 AM]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advertisement
no, u have to duplicate the vertices
(its how the hardware works so it aint possible in d3d either)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Urggh... I was hoping you wouldn't say that.

I know the GameCube used a specialized ATI chipset, but I'd presume that after 3+ years something as useful as having multiple indices per attribute would have at least made it into consumer-level hardware by now.

*grumble*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Future version of D3D for PC will most probably allow for manual vertex fetching from within vertex shader. You could use vertex texture fetch (within vertex shader) nowadays, but it won't probably be an optimal solution.

Edit: Oops, somehow I thought I was on another forum ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by bpoint
Urggh... I was hoping you wouldn't say that.

I know the GameCube used a specialized ATI chipset, but I'd presume that after 3+ years something as useful as having multiple indices per attribute would have at least made it into consumer-level hardware by now.

*grumble*


Sorry to be pedantic, but no it doesn't.
NGC uses an ArtX chip, which firm was later bought by ATI (some months before the NGC release), so it has nothing to do with ATI PC products. (But is related to XBox & Revolution GPUs)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is there anyone other than me who thinks that having separate indicies for each attribute would be incredibly useful? I guess you'd have to actually use it first to realize the amount of data it can save. :)

MickeyMouse's comment on pulling vertices from a vertex shader sounds interesting though... I wonder how long until something like that gets implemented.

I don't exactly know how OpenGL extensions are decided upon, but I'd be more than willing to put together an extension specification _just_ to have future drivers and hardware vendors support this functionality.

Comments, anyone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by bpoint
I've been using VBOs to store (for the time being) just indices and vertex data, and have decided to add vertex colors into the mix.

I went back and took a look at how to setup glColorPointer and then realized that the indicies that I would be passing to glDrawElements only represent the index into both arrays, not an individual index for vertex and color separately! This means that a large number of vertices (and colors) will have to be duplicated, because I cannot index through both arrays with different indicies per vertex.

For example, a simple cube with only 8 vertices where each face had a different color would end up requiring 8*6=48 vertices (even though the actual vertex positions are the same) because the color table requires different values for each vertex.

Sorry, I come from a GameCube background where we were able to do this. :)

Is there something I'm overlooking, or perhaps an extension which provides this functionality? Or is this just impossible under OpenGL? (I'd also like to know if it's possible or not under DirectX if anyone else out there knows the answer.)


I am not understanding how you are getting 48? You don't create new vertices after you specify them unless you are tesselating or doing a displacement mapping of some kind? If you have 8 vertices then you have 8 sets of vertex data which includes position, color, texture coords, secondary color, normals. For color OpenGL needs the color per vertex if I am right (Please correct me if I am wrong) to do shading from vertex to vertex if you declare a new color at each vertex...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I apologize -- I was wrong about the original calculation of 48. A single vertex would be shared by only three polygons, not 6, so the actual number of required vertices is 8*3=24. Regardless, vertex data still needs to be unnecessarily duplicated.

Anyway, I'll explain. Given a simple cube, with 8 vertices, and the indices to render it (ignore the vertex winding order for example's sake):

Vector3 verts[8] = {
{ -1.0f, -1.0f, -1.0f },
{ -1.0f, -1.0f, 1.0f },
{ -1.0f, 1.0f, -1.0f },
{ -1.0f, 1.0f, 1.0f },
{ 1.0f, -1.0f, -1.0f },
{ 1.0f, -1.0f, 1.0f },
{ 1.0f, 1.0f, -1.0f },
{ 1.0f, 1.0f, 1.0f }
};

u16 indices[4][6] = {
0, 1, 2, 3,
4, 5, 6, 7,
0, 1, 4, 5,
2, 3, 6, 7,
0, 2, 4, 6,
1, 3, 5, 7
};


This can now be rendered with:

glEnableClientState(GL_VERTEX_ARRAY);
glVertexPointer(3, GL_FLOAT, 0, verts);
for (int t = 0; t < 6; t++)
glDrawElements(GL_TRIANGLE_STRIP, 4, GL_UNSIGNED_SHORT, &indicies[t]);


Now I want to add color per vertex, with a specific color per face. This means that each vertex requires its own color. Since indicies only represent a vertex and not an individual attribute, the vertices will need to be duplicated for each color that is different. This is best shown by using interleaved data:

typedef struct
{
Vector3 pos;
u32 rgba;
} Vertex;

Vertex verts[24] = {
{ { -1.0f, -1.0f, -1.0f }, RED },
{ { -1.0f, -1.0f, 1.0f }, RED },
{ { -1.0f, 1.0f, -1.0f }, RED },
{ { -1.0f, 1.0f, 1.0f }, RED },
{ { 1.0f, -1.0f, -1.0f }, GREEN },
{ { 1.0f, -1.0f, 1.0f }, GREEN },
{ { 1.0f, 1.0f, -1.0f }, GREEN },
{ { 1.0f, 1.0f, 1.0f }, GREEN },
{ { -1.0f, -1.0f, -1.0f }, BLUE },
{ { -1.0f, -1.0f, 1.0f }, BLUE },
{ { 1.0f, -1.0f, -1.0f }, BLUE },
{ { 1.0f, -1.0f, 1.0f }, BLUE },
{ { -1.0f, 1.0f, -1.0f }, YELLOW },
{ { -1.0f, 1.0f, 1.0f }, YELLOW },
{ { 1.0f, 1.0f, -1.0f }, YELLOW },
{ { 1.0f, 1.0f, 1.0f }, YELLOW },
{ { -1.0f, -1.0f, -1.0f }, CYAN },
{ { -1.0f, 1.0f, -1.0f }, CYAN },
{ { 1.0f, -1.0f, -1.0f }, CYAN },
{ { 1.0f, 1.0f, -1.0f }, CYAN },
{ { -1.0f, -1.0f, 1.0f }, MAGENTA },
{ { -1.0f, 1.0f, 1.0f }, MAGENTA },
{ { 1.0f, -1.0f, 1.0f }, MAGENTA },
{ { 1.0f, 1.0f, 1.0f }, MAGENTA }
};


As you can see, there are three times the number of vertices required than would be necessary if the position and color data were split into different buffers and likewise indexed separately. On the GameCube, we were able to do this:

Vector3 verts[8] = {
{ -1.0f, -1.0f, -1.0f },
{ -1.0f, -1.0f, 1.0f },
{ -1.0f, 1.0f, -1.0f },
{ -1.0f, 1.0f, 1.0f },
{ 1.0f, -1.0f, -1.0f },
{ 1.0f, -1.0f, 1.0f },
{ 1.0f, 1.0f, -1.0f },
{ 1.0f, 1.0f, 1.0f }
};

u32 colors[6] = {
RED, GREEN, BLUE, YELLOW, CYAN, MAGENTA
};


And then send two indicies per vertex. While this is a fairly simple test case, larger models might be able to have a decent amount of unnecessary data trimmed down. Skinned models might not benefit that _much_ from having separate index buffers because most polygons are joined together with the same normal, same vertex color, and same texture coordinate. Basically any vertex that does not share the _exact_ same attributes for all polygons attached to it needs to be duplicated.

Technically, this could be accomplished under OpenGL as well by maintaining multiple index buffers and calling glColorPointer after each call to glDrawElements. This would allow the same vertex buffer to be used while referencing different colors, but this is a fairly specialized case and not very efficient.

I also don't think that it would be that hard to implement from a hardware perspective. There are already pointers to different attribute buffers, so why aren't there multiple indicies for each of those attributes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I definitely agree that there should be a way to do this, I have commonly wished it were possible, because most modeling formats and models have more texture coords then vertices because they are specialized for each face. If we could specify which color/texcoord/vertex indices separately it would be much easier to render these. To bad there isn't a way presently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Exactly -- changes in texture coordinates also requires vertex duplication. An extension like this would definitely cut down on some excess memory while improving performance (less vertex data to process / cross the memory bus, or if you're using VBOs, more texture space).

If there are enough people that think something like this might be useful, I'll write up an OpenGL extension specification and send e-mail to some of the contacts at nVidia and ATI to see what the best way to progress would be. It may never actually be implemented, but it certainly can't hurt to try. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The only problem is, afaik, the hardware doesnt work in this manner. Just from a vertex cache pov I can see this becoming a small nightmare, never mind the fetching of the data.

Infact, data fetching and cache coherance is the main reason you interlace the vertex, so that everything is located next to each other in memory, making data transfers faster as the GPU doesnt need to jump around memory AND improving cache coherance when it comes to reusing the data.

While it might seem like a 'handy' idea, its probably a going to be a nightmare to do in hardware in the future and certainly wont work now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not necessarily. Well-compacted indices will tend to have more cache hits because the data is already in the cache, rather than needing to fetch extra (read: duplicated) vertex data from memory. I can understand interleaving being faster due to the size of a cache line pulling in multiple vertices at a time, but in the end, there would be more data to plough through than if smaller buffers (even laid out sporadically in memory) were used more efficiently.

I don't doubt the hardware doesn't work like this now, as the GameCube was specialized hardware. But if a call was put in to request a feature like this, nVidia, ATI and whoever else can decide how easy or difficult it would be and either implement it for future designs or simply ignore it. If they do implement it, great. If not, oh well -- I'll just have to stick with the existing methods. :)

I guess I might as well try starting some e-mail dialogue with them to see what they think...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You should probably check the OpenGL extensions/suggestions forum first on Opengl.org (infact, do a general search) as I'm sure this kinda thing comes up often.

As for the cache issue, the gain probably wouldnt be as significant as you think. For ALOT of models there are very few shared verticies, the cube example often comes up but its a very bad model for 'real world' data. In real world conditions you have to duplicate around 1/3 of the vertices at the most. As such you'll end up throwing more indicies down the pipeline and probably not gaining anything in the real world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For those of you interested, I've made a post on OpenGL.org's discussion boards regarding this. We'll see where it goes from here...

Phantom: How much performance would be affected is really dependent on the kind of data being rendered. Like I said before, skinned models tend to use the same attributes for all shared vertices, but map models would benefit from using repetitive data (vertex color and normals come to mind). I agree, my cube example was rather extreme. However, from experience, being able to use multiple indices for each attribute definitely help cut down on memory requirements -- which can only be a good thing. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Advertisement
  • Advertisement
  • Popular Now

  • Advertisement
  • Similar Content

    • By reenigne
      For those that don't know me. I am the individual who's two videos are listed here under setup for https://wiki.libsdl.org/Tutorials
      I also run grhmedia.com where I host the projects and code for the tutorials I have online.
      Recently, I received a notice from youtube they will be implementing their new policy in protecting video content as of which I won't be monetized till I meat there required number of viewers and views each month.

      Frankly, I'm pretty sick of youtube. I put up a video and someone else learns from it and puts up another video and because of the way youtube does their placement they end up with more views.
      Even guys that clearly post false information such as one individual who said GLEW 2.0 was broken because he didn't know how to compile it. He in short didn't know how to modify the script he used because he didn't understand make files and how the requirements of the compiler and library changes needed some different flags.

      At the end of the month when they implement this I will take down the content and host on my own server purely and it will be a paid system and or patreon. 

      I get my videos may be a bit dry, I generally figure people are there to learn how to do something and I rather not waste their time. 
      I used to also help people for free even those coming from the other videos. That won't be the case any more. I used to just take anyone emails and work with them my email is posted on the site.

      I don't expect to get the required number of subscribers in that time or increased views. Even if I did well it wouldn't take care of each reoccurring month.
      I figure this is simpler and I don't plan on putting some sort of exorbitant fee for a monthly subscription or the like.
      I was thinking on the lines of a few dollars 1,2, and 3 and the larger subscription gets you assistance with the content in the tutorials if needed that month.
      Maybe another fee if it is related but not directly in the content. 
      The fees would serve to cut down on the number of people who ask for help and maybe encourage some of the people to actually pay attention to what is said rather than do their own thing. That actually turns out to be 90% of the issues. I spent 6 hours helping one individual last week I must have asked him 20 times did you do exactly like I said in the video even pointed directly to the section. When he finally sent me a copy of the what he entered I knew then and there he had not. I circled it and I pointed out that wasn't what I said to do in the video. I didn't tell him what was wrong and how I knew that way he would go back and actually follow what it said to do. He then reported it worked. Yea, no kidding following directions works. But hey isn't alone and well its part of the learning process.

      So the point of this isn't to be a gripe session. I'm just looking for a bit of feed back. Do you think the fees are unreasonable?
      Should I keep the youtube channel and do just the fees with patreon or do you think locking the content to my site and require a subscription is an idea.

      I'm just looking at the fact it is unrealistic to think youtube/google will actually get stuff right or that youtube viewers will actually bother to start looking for more accurate videos. 
    • By Balma Alparisi
      i got error 1282 in my code.
      sf::ContextSettings settings; settings.majorVersion = 4; settings.minorVersion = 5; settings.attributeFlags = settings.Core; sf::Window window; window.create(sf::VideoMode(1600, 900), "Texture Unit Rectangle", sf::Style::Close, settings); window.setActive(true); window.setVerticalSyncEnabled(true); glewInit(); GLuint shaderProgram = createShaderProgram("FX/Rectangle.vss", "FX/Rectangle.fss"); float vertex[] = { -0.5f,0.5f,0.0f, 0.0f,0.0f, -0.5f,-0.5f,0.0f, 0.0f,1.0f, 0.5f,0.5f,0.0f, 1.0f,0.0f, 0.5,-0.5f,0.0f, 1.0f,1.0f, }; GLuint indices[] = { 0,1,2, 1,2,3, }; GLuint vao; glGenVertexArrays(1, &vao); glBindVertexArray(vao); GLuint vbo; glGenBuffers(1, &vbo); glBindBuffer(GL_ARRAY_BUFFER, vbo); glBufferData(GL_ARRAY_BUFFER, sizeof(vertex), vertex, GL_STATIC_DRAW); GLuint ebo; glGenBuffers(1, &ebo); glBindBuffer(GL_ELEMENT_ARRAY_BUFFER, ebo); glBufferData(GL_ELEMENT_ARRAY_BUFFER, sizeof(indices), indices,GL_STATIC_DRAW); glVertexAttribPointer(0, 3, GL_FLOAT, false, sizeof(float) * 5, (void*)0); glEnableVertexAttribArray(0); glVertexAttribPointer(1, 2, GL_FLOAT, false, sizeof(float) * 5, (void*)(sizeof(float) * 3)); glEnableVertexAttribArray(1); GLuint texture[2]; glGenTextures(2, texture); glActiveTexture(GL_TEXTURE0); glBindTexture(GL_TEXTURE_2D, texture[0]); glTexParameteri(GL_TEXTURE_2D, GL_TEXTURE_WRAP_S, GL_CLAMP_TO_EDGE); glTexParameteri(GL_TEXTURE_2D, GL_TEXTURE_WRAP_T, GL_CLAMP_TO_EDGE); glTexParameteri(GL_TEXTURE_2D, GL_TEXTURE_MAG_FILTER, GL_LINEAR); glTexParameteri(GL_TEXTURE_2D, GL_TEXTURE_MIN_FILTER, GL_LINEAR); sf::Image* imageOne = new sf::Image; bool isImageOneLoaded = imageOne->loadFromFile("Texture/container.jpg"); if (isImageOneLoaded) { glTexImage2D(GL_TEXTURE_2D, 0, GL_RGBA, imageOne->getSize().x, imageOne->getSize().y, 0, GL_RGBA, GL_UNSIGNED_BYTE, imageOne->getPixelsPtr()); glGenerateMipmap(GL_TEXTURE_2D); } delete imageOne; glActiveTexture(GL_TEXTURE1); glBindTexture(GL_TEXTURE_2D, texture[1]); glTexParameteri(GL_TEXTURE_2D, GL_TEXTURE_WRAP_S, GL_CLAMP_TO_EDGE); glTexParameteri(GL_TEXTURE_2D, GL_TEXTURE_WRAP_T, GL_CLAMP_TO_EDGE); glTexParameteri(GL_TEXTURE_2D, GL_TEXTURE_MAG_FILTER, GL_LINEAR); glTexParameteri(GL_TEXTURE_2D, GL_TEXTURE_MIN_FILTER, GL_LINEAR); sf::Image* imageTwo = new sf::Image; bool isImageTwoLoaded = imageTwo->loadFromFile("Texture/awesomeface.png"); if (isImageTwoLoaded) { glTexImage2D(GL_TEXTURE_2D, 0, GL_RGBA, imageTwo->getSize().x, imageTwo->getSize().y, 0, GL_RGBA, GL_UNSIGNED_BYTE, imageTwo->getPixelsPtr()); glGenerateMipmap(GL_TEXTURE_2D); } delete imageTwo; glUniform1i(glGetUniformLocation(shaderProgram, "inTextureOne"), 0); glUniform1i(glGetUniformLocation(shaderProgram, "inTextureTwo"), 1); GLenum error = glGetError(); std::cout << error << std::endl; sf::Event event; bool isRunning = true; while (isRunning) { while (window.pollEvent(event)) { if (event.type == event.Closed) { isRunning = false; } } glClear(GL_COLOR_BUFFER_BIT); if (isImageOneLoaded && isImageTwoLoaded) { glActiveTexture(GL_TEXTURE0); glBindTexture(GL_TEXTURE_2D, texture[0]); glActiveTexture(GL_TEXTURE1); glBindTexture(GL_TEXTURE_2D, texture[1]); glUseProgram(shaderProgram); } glBindVertexArray(vao); glDrawElements(GL_TRIANGLES, 6, GL_UNSIGNED_INT, nullptr); glBindVertexArray(0); window.display(); } glDeleteVertexArrays(1, &vao); glDeleteBuffers(1, &vbo); glDeleteBuffers(1, &ebo); glDeleteProgram(shaderProgram); glDeleteTextures(2,texture); return 0; } and this is the vertex shader
      #version 450 core layout(location=0) in vec3 inPos; layout(location=1) in vec2 inTexCoord; out vec2 TexCoord; void main() { gl_Position=vec4(inPos,1.0); TexCoord=inTexCoord; } and the fragment shader
      #version 450 core in vec2 TexCoord; uniform sampler2D inTextureOne; uniform sampler2D inTextureTwo; out vec4 FragmentColor; void main() { FragmentColor=mix(texture(inTextureOne,TexCoord),texture(inTextureTwo,TexCoord),0.2); } I was expecting awesomeface.png on top of container.jpg

    • By khawk
      We've just released all of the source code for the NeHe OpenGL lessons on our Github page at https://github.com/gamedev-net/nehe-opengl. code - 43 total platforms, configurations, and languages are included.
      Now operated by GameDev.net, NeHe is located at http://nehe.gamedev.net where it has been a valuable resource for developers wanting to learn OpenGL and graphics programming.

      View full story
    • By TheChubu
      The Khronos™ Group, an open consortium of leading hardware and software companies, announces from the SIGGRAPH 2017 Conference the immediate public availability of the OpenGL® 4.6 specification. OpenGL 4.6 integrates the functionality of numerous ARB and EXT extensions created by Khronos members AMD, Intel, and NVIDIA into core, including the capability to ingest SPIR-V™ shaders.
      SPIR-V is a Khronos-defined standard intermediate language for parallel compute and graphics, which enables content creators to simplify their shader authoring and management pipelines while providing significant source shading language flexibility. OpenGL 4.6 adds support for ingesting SPIR-V shaders to the core specification, guaranteeing that SPIR-V shaders will be widely supported by OpenGL implementations.
      OpenGL 4.6 adds the functionality of these ARB extensions to OpenGL’s core specification:
      GL_ARB_gl_spirv and GL_ARB_spirv_extensions to standardize SPIR-V support for OpenGL GL_ARB_indirect_parameters and GL_ARB_shader_draw_parameters for reducing the CPU overhead associated with rendering batches of geometry GL_ARB_pipeline_statistics_query and GL_ARB_transform_feedback_overflow_querystandardize OpenGL support for features available in Direct3D GL_ARB_texture_filter_anisotropic (based on GL_EXT_texture_filter_anisotropic) brings previously IP encumbered functionality into OpenGL to improve the visual quality of textured scenes GL_ARB_polygon_offset_clamp (based on GL_EXT_polygon_offset_clamp) suppresses a common visual artifact known as a “light leak” associated with rendering shadows GL_ARB_shader_atomic_counter_ops and GL_ARB_shader_group_vote add shader intrinsics supported by all desktop vendors to improve functionality and performance GL_KHR_no_error reduces driver overhead by allowing the application to indicate that it expects error-free operation so errors need not be generated In addition to the above features being added to OpenGL 4.6, the following are being released as extensions:
      GL_KHR_parallel_shader_compile allows applications to launch multiple shader compile threads to improve shader compile throughput WGL_ARB_create_context_no_error and GXL_ARB_create_context_no_error allow no error contexts to be created with WGL or GLX that support the GL_KHR_no_error extension “I’m proud to announce OpenGL 4.6 as the most feature-rich version of OpenGL yet. We've brought together the most popular, widely-supported extensions into a new core specification to give OpenGL developers and end users an improved baseline feature set. This includes resolving previous intellectual property roadblocks to bringing anisotropic texture filtering and polygon offset clamping into the core specification to enable widespread implementation and usage,” said Piers Daniell, chair of the OpenGL Working Group at Khronos. “The OpenGL working group will continue to respond to market needs and work with GPU vendors to ensure OpenGL remains a viable and evolving graphics API for all its customers and users across many vital industries.“
      The OpenGL 4.6 specification can be found at https://khronos.org/registry/OpenGL/index_gl.php. The GLSL to SPIR-V compiler glslang has been updated with GLSL 4.60 support, and can be found at https://github.com/KhronosGroup/glslang.
      Sophisticated graphics applications will also benefit from a set of newly released extensions for both OpenGL and OpenGL ES to enable interoperability with Vulkan and Direct3D. These extensions are named:
      GL_EXT_memory_object GL_EXT_memory_object_fd GL_EXT_memory_object_win32 GL_EXT_semaphore GL_EXT_semaphore_fd GL_EXT_semaphore_win32 GL_EXT_win32_keyed_mutex They can be found at: https://khronos.org/registry/OpenGL/index_gl.php
      Industry Support for OpenGL 4.6
      “With OpenGL 4.6 our customers have an improved set of core features available on our full range of OpenGL 4.x capable GPUs. These features provide improved rendering quality, performance and functionality. As the graphics industry’s most popular API, we fully support OpenGL and will continue to work closely with the Khronos Group on the development of new OpenGL specifications and extensions for our customers. NVIDIA has released beta OpenGL 4.6 drivers today at https://developer.nvidia.com/opengl-driver so developers can use these new features right away,” said Bob Pette, vice president, Professional Graphics at NVIDIA.
      "OpenGL 4.6 will be the first OpenGL release where conformant open source implementations based on the Mesa project will be deliverable in a reasonable timeframe after release. The open sourcing of the OpenGL conformance test suite and ongoing work between Khronos and X.org will also allow for non-vendor led open source implementations to achieve conformance in the near future," said David Airlie, senior principal engineer at Red Hat, and developer on Mesa/X.org projects.

      View full story
    • By _OskaR
      Hi,
      I have an OpenGL application but without possibility to wite own shaders.
      I need to perform small VS modification - is possible to do it in an alternative way? Do we have apps or driver modifictions which will catch the shader sent to GPU and override it?
  • Advertisement