Sign in to follow this  
NumberXaero

OpenGL Vulkan is Next-Gen OpenGL

Recommended Posts

Yeah, as I said in the other thread, it seems sane... a Khronos take on the Mantle API.

Interested to see the complete model; do we get separate command queues for graphics and compute? (based on the ImgTec blog this looks to be the case!) how does it deal with multiple gpu machine? what about upload/download control?

But on the face of it things look sane... which I still find confusing... biggrin.png Edited by phantom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will work on any platform that supports OpenGL ES 3.1 and up

 

Now THAT is exciting news.

 

EDIT: Maybe I spoke too soon, AMD doesn't support it then?  Weird.

Edited by Boreal Games

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ES3.1 is just a target hardware level; AMD just don't have a driver for it is all and ES is used because Mobile.

AMD's hardware will support this, likely anything which can support GL3.3 (which is roughly where ES3.1 is) has the ability to support this API which means basically all hardware in the wild today on the desktop. (driver allowing.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


AMD's hardware will support this, likely anything which can support GL3.3 (which is roughly where ES3.1 is) has the ability to support this API which means basically all hardware in the wild today on the desktop. (driver allowing.)
I can only hope. OpenGL 3.3 support in AMD hardware goes back to HD 2xxx series, but they stopped supporting newer extensions on that hardware after OpenGL 4.2, whereas nVidia stopped at 4.4. Thus why something really useful like ARB_direct_state_access is only available in OpenGL 4.5 hardware, or why something simple like ARB_vertex_attrib_binding works in a nVidia GeForce 8800 GT from 2007, but doesn't works on an ATI Radeon HD4870 from 2009.

 

I'm not seeing them supporting Vulkan on anything pre-HD5xxx, maybe they'll go as far as not supporting Vulkan on anything that is pre-GCN.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the driver support is there too, then D3D12 is dead in the water for me

Microsoft is not listed as supporter (they didn't support OGL for years now,right ?), and if vulkan will hold its promises and mantle is the preferred console API, why should someone want to use D3D12 ? To support Win10 games ? With microsoft history of loosing interest in projects (starting from DirectPlay/DirectSound over to several DirectX version up to XNA), who want to risk to use a version which might be unsupport in 1-2 years ?

Edited by Ashaman73

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like Khronos finally got their API redesign, pretty good timing too.

 

But in order for this to take off there needs to be good drivers. Not sure if Apple will keep up-to-date drivers (past bad OpenGL support, Metal) and not sure how Microsoft will cooperate (DX12 still not available). So it's mostly up to the GPU manufacturers (NV, AMD, Intel, PowerVR) to maintain good drivers. From [0], it looks like there's still a lot of work to be done.

 

[0] - www.youtube.com/watch?v=KdnRI0nquKc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why should someone want to use D3D12 ?

 
The reason to prefer D3D has always been more robust drivers and better tools on an API that hits ~95% of the target market.  That's it.  Preference for one vendor or one platform comes nowhere into it, nor do any malicious backdoor shenanigans.  The D3D driver model was simply a better driver model that, once the emotional aspect of the original API war burned out, became obvious to everyone that it allowed for this to happen.  But that's also the hurdle that Vulkan now has to get over (and Khronos are making the right kind of noises about this, which is encouraging).
 
Right now Vulkan seems to have a head-start, and if we can get a spec, sample apps, some functional tools and reasonable drivers from all 3 desktop vendors by SIGGRAPH, it should eat D3D 12.
 
On the other hand if Khronos stall or if the vendors fail to deliver then D3D 12 will have a chance to jump back ahead.
 
Either way the next year is going to be interesting. biggrin.png


Robust tools are a huge winning point there. OpenGL could target 95% of the market as well, but the lack of decent vendor agnostic tools made it a real pain in the keister to use. Using an API where you can actually debug what is going on (PIX for example) is really important. Unfortunately, OpenGL never really had that capability and you were stuck with whatever tools the various GPU vendors provided. Which, frankly, all suck in their own unique ways.

Vulkan certainly looks interesting, but I also recall the LAST TIME we were promised something great OpenGL wise. You might remember how that ended. So at the moment I'm going to go with current mood: Pessimistic without further evidence. Edited by Washu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 


Why would MS have to do anything?
They don't support OpenGL, Mantle, OpenCL and CUDA and yet they all work just fine... this is no different.

 

Not on tablet/phone hardware they don't. Neither is there VS support, without wacky plugins from IHVs. Still, I don't know if I dare to dream that the new standards-attentive MS will actually boost Vulkan to first class support.

Edited by Promit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not on tablet/phone hardware they don't.

I'm not sure that Microsoft-based phones and tablets represent a credible enough install-base to be worried about.

 

More interesting to see if Apple will let this in the door to iOS - without that chunk of the mobile market, you'll be stuck supporting Vulcan and Metal for the foreseeable future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Any idea how vulkan will be "deviding" the support for lots of different devices?
Meaning that you don't have a disadvantage when developing for current gen consoles/pc versus a gui for a washing machine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AMD published a new release: http://community.amd.com/community/amd-blogs/amd-gaming/blog/2015/03/03/one-of-mantles-futures-vulkan

The main point being that Vulkan is essentially an iterated cross platform version of Mantle. I like that AMD was willing to describe their own press release hours earlier as cryptic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

and not sure how Microsoft will cooperate (DX12 still not available).


Why would MS have to do anything?
They don't support OpenGL, Mantle, OpenCL and CUDA and yet they all work just fine... this is no different.

 

 

I was trying to bring up the fact that some people believe that Microsoft sabotaged the OpenGL implementation on Windows to increase DirectX adoption. And whether Microsoft will allow Vulkan and Mantle to be first-class citizens with DX12 (if it's even possible) and whether Microsoft will keep their open-source friendly ways up (like Promit mentioned).

 

IIRC, Apple has to explicitly allow support for new APIs because they write their own drivers. So "it just works" isn't always possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

  • Announcements

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      628401
    • Total Posts
      2982457
  • Similar Content

    • By test opty
      Hi all,
       
      I'm starting OpenGL using a tut on the Web. But at this point I would like to know the primitives needed for creating a window using OpenGL. So on Windows and using MS VS 2017, what is the simplest code required to render a window with the title of "First Rectangle", please?
       
       
    • By DejayHextrix
      Hi, New here. 
      I need some help. My fiance and I like to play this mobile game online that goes by real time. Her and I are always working but when we have free time we like to play this game. We don't always got time throughout the day to Queue Buildings, troops, Upgrades....etc.... 
      I was told to look into DLL Injection and OpenGL/DirectX Hooking. Is this true? Is this what I need to learn? 
      How do I read the Android files, or modify the files, or get the in-game tags/variables for the game I want? 
      Any assistance on this would be most appreciated. I been everywhere and seems no one knows or is to lazy to help me out. It would be nice to have assistance for once. I don't know what I need to learn. 
      So links of topics I need to learn within the comment section would be SOOOOO.....Helpful. Anything to just get me started. 
      Thanks, 
      Dejay Hextrix 
    • By mellinoe
      Hi all,
      First time poster here, although I've been reading posts here for quite a while. This place has been invaluable for learning graphics programming -- thanks for a great resource!
      Right now, I'm working on a graphics abstraction layer for .NET which supports D3D11, Vulkan, and OpenGL at the moment. I have implemented most of my planned features already, and things are working well. Some remaining features that I am planning are Compute Shaders, and some flavor of read-write shader resources. At the moment, my shaders can just get simple read-only access to a uniform (or constant) buffer, a texture, or a sampler. Unfortunately, I'm having a tough time grasping the distinctions between all of the different kinds of read-write resources that are available. In D3D alone, there seem to be 5 or 6 different kinds of resources with similar but different characteristics. On top of that, I get the impression that some of them are more or less "obsoleted" by the newer kinds, and don't have much of a place in modern code. There seem to be a few pivots:
      The data source/destination (buffer or texture) Read-write or read-only Structured or unstructured (?) Ordered vs unordered (?) These are just my observations based on a lot of MSDN and OpenGL doc reading. For my library, I'm not interested in exposing every possibility to the user -- just trying to find a good "middle-ground" that can be represented cleanly across API's which is good enough for common scenarios.
      Can anyone give a sort of "overview" of the different options, and perhaps compare/contrast the concepts between Direct3D, OpenGL, and Vulkan? I'd also be very interested in hearing how other folks have abstracted these concepts in their libraries.
    • By aejt
      I recently started getting into graphics programming (2nd try, first try was many years ago) and I'm working on a 3d rendering engine which I hope to be able to make a 3D game with sooner or later. I have plenty of C++ experience, but not a lot when it comes to graphics, and while it's definitely going much better this time, I'm having trouble figuring out how assets are usually handled by engines.
      I'm not having trouble with handling the GPU resources, but more so with how the resources should be defined and used in the system (materials, models, etc).
      This is my plan now, I've implemented most of it except for the XML parts and factories and those are the ones I'm not sure of at all:
      I have these classes:
      For GPU resources:
      Geometry: holds and manages everything needed to render a geometry: VAO, VBO, EBO. Texture: holds and manages a texture which is loaded into the GPU. Shader: holds and manages a shader which is loaded into the GPU. For assets relying on GPU resources:
      Material: holds a shader resource, multiple texture resources, as well as uniform settings. Mesh: holds a geometry and a material. Model: holds multiple meshes, possibly in a tree structure to more easily support skinning later on? For handling GPU resources:
      ResourceCache<T>: T can be any resource loaded into the GPU. It owns these resources and only hands out handles to them on request (currently string identifiers are used when requesting handles, but all resources are stored in a vector and each handle only contains resource's index in that vector) Resource<T>: The handles given out from ResourceCache. The handles are reference counted and to get the underlying resource you simply deference like with pointers (*handle).  
      And my plan is to define everything into these XML documents to abstract away files:
      Resources.xml for ref-counted GPU resources (geometry, shaders, textures) Resources are assigned names/ids and resource files, and possibly some attributes (what vertex attributes does this geometry have? what vertex attributes does this shader expect? what uniforms does this shader use? and so on) Are reference counted using ResourceCache<T> Assets.xml for assets using the GPU resources (materials, meshes, models) Assets are not reference counted, but they hold handles to ref-counted resources. References the resources defined in Resources.xml by names/ids. The XMLs are loaded into some structure in memory which is then used for loading the resources/assets using factory classes:
      Factory classes for resources:
      For example, a texture factory could contain the texture definitions from the XML containing data about textures in the game, as well as a cache containing all loaded textures. This means it has mappings from each name/id to a file and when asked to load a texture with a name/id, it can look up its path and use a "BinaryLoader" to either load the file and create the resource directly, or asynchronously load the file's data into a queue which then can be read from later to create the resources synchronously in the GL context. These factories only return handles.
      Factory classes for assets:
      Much like for resources, these classes contain the definitions for the assets they can load. For example, with the definition the MaterialFactory will know which shader, textures and possibly uniform a certain material has, and with the help of TextureFactory and ShaderFactory, it can retrieve handles to the resources it needs (Shader + Textures), setup itself from XML data (uniform values), and return a created instance of requested material. These factories return actual instances, not handles (but the instances contain handles).
       
       
      Is this a good or commonly used approach? Is this going to bite me in the ass later on? Are there other more preferable approaches? Is this outside of the scope of a 3d renderer and should be on the engine side? I'd love to receive and kind of advice or suggestions!
      Thanks!
    • By nedondev
      I 'm learning how to create game by using opengl with c/c++ coding, so here is my fist game. In video description also have game contain in Dropbox. May be I will make it better in future.
      Thanks.
  • Popular Now