Slashdot Mirror
AMD Adds OpenGL 3.0 Support To Graphics Drivers
arcticstoat writes "Just a few months after The Khronos Group unveiled the Open GL 3.0 spec last year, AMD has included full support for the new API in its first WHQL driver of 2009 — Catalyst 9.1. OpenGL 3.0 requires DirectX 10-level hardware, such as AMD's Radeon HD series of GPUs. However, unlike Direct3D 10, OpenGL 3.0's features can be enabled on both Windows XP and Vista, as well as Linux and Mac OS, which could be a bonus for game developers looking for a broad base of customers. The Khronos Group claims that OpenGL 3.0 has a 'rough feature parity' with Direct3D 10, and it provides Shader Model 4.0 support, including features such as the Geometry Shader. The Khronos Group also says that the new API will interoperate with the GPGPU API OpenCL, which could allow OpenGL 3.0 to compete with the Compute Shader promised in Microsoft's DirectX 11 API."
Now we just have a waiting game, to see if any major developers will adopt it. It seems these days they just want to port over xbox games so directx is the obvious choice.
If sharing a song makes you a pirate, what do I have to share to be a ninja?
Honestly. I mean, that won't make their OpenGL 2.0 drivers actually work, and there's no doubt in my mind that the 3.0 code will be faulty as well.
I will have to update to see, but ATI's OpenGL support for as long as I can remember has sucked compared to Nvidia's.
But will it install properly this time?
I'm hoping that this will eventually lead to a fix of many ATI-related issues on Linux and 3D, as their cards seem to experience a lot of weird GL bugs compared to Nvidia, etc.
KDE4 on an ATI card, for example, does lots of weird things if you try to use FMV or have 3d apps and the 3d accelerated functions. Likewise Cedega has been known to behave oddly with ATI cards.
On a positive note about ATI though, their drivers seem to have improved quite noticeably since the AMD takeover, and in some instances are updated quicker than Nvidia's. When 2.6.28 came out, the Nvidia driver wouldn't compile but ATI's drivers worked just fine. Also, ATI's installer has a GUI portion for those users that aren't so comfortable with a command-line.
http://developer.nvidia.com/object/opengl_3_driver.html
Now where's Intel? :p
if you want to sway the game companies, chuck your xbox.
Does that mean I have to buy one just to chuck it?
Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
The Khronos Group claims that OpenGL 3.0 has a 'rough feature parity' with Direct3D 10
If by that you mean, kinda has the same functionality but it's hidden under piles of legacy crap, then yes ok... But let's just call a spade a spade - It's OpenGL 2.2, not OpenGL3.0. If you spend an hour or two with D3D 10 it becomes apparent pretty that there's a pretty big gulf between the two API's.
My biggest gripe with OpenGL at the moment is that any monkey can write code using it normally following the red books as a guide. The amount of code I've got to strip out of our codebase that's all been done with fixed function immediate mode is just not very funny. I bet you any money that the GL3.0 red book will still devote large chapters to the stuff you shouldn't be using.
Sadly, if you want to write high performance openGL code, then your only real option is to refer the DX10 documentation. Find the required methods in those docs, then hunt through the GL extension registry until you find something similar. Having done that, write your lovely NV specific code. Then write an ATI specific codepath. Then write the Intel code path. It's time consuming, error prone and a real pita.
If only Khronos had done what they'd been promising for the last 2 years and turned OpenGL3.0 into the API that we've all been asking for.... I'll get excited again when the GL3.1 spec + drivers come out, and am sure to be disappointed once more, but I live in hope....
Sorry for the rant. Anyhow, thanks ATI for finally getting GL3.0 support into your drivers. Much appreciated. It's only been 6 months since the spec was released....
Assume for sake of discussion that game companies using DirectX is a bad thing.
It's OK. No console developers are writing code using DirectX (barring those targetting windows) - We have XDX for the xbox, but's thats not the same thing at all.
Also I'm not sure where this myth about openGL being used on consoles has come from, because the truth is very different. We are actually writing rendering code in SDK's specific to Wii and PS3. There is no OpenGL support. (There are some really crappy openGL wrappers that are too in-efficient to be useful if that's what you mean?)
Yes. We'll be expecting results within a week. Send us a clear message.
Not really all that surprising. I predict there will be many posts saying, "Ha, so when do the open-source drivers get this support?" so let me say it here, first.
OpenGL 3.0 support will be added to Gallium3D as it becomes supported, and Radeons will gain that support when they are added to Gallium3D. There is no timetable for this support.
~ C.
when will they support accelerated decoding of h264 streams? Until then using nvidia for its VDPAU is a nobrainer.
'Impossible' is a word that humans use far too often. -- Seven of Nine
Also I'm not sure where this myth about openGL being used on consoles has come from, because the truth is very different. We are actually writing rendering code in SDK's specific to Wii and PS3. There is no OpenGL support. (There are some really crappy openGL wrappers that are too in-efficient to be useful if that's what you mean?)
OFC if you have to port the game between 4 architectures, (directx,ps3,xdx,wii) it would be beneficial to seperate out the rendering code, which in turn makes it easier to port to openGL right?
Hopefully as the mac user base increases the cost of writing that extra rendering backend will become less than the benifit. OFC with some wishful thinking eventually, the cost of porting the executable to linux/wine (with an openGL renderer), becomes less than the handful of sales to linux users.
IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
I did some sparse game development on the N64. It had a library that was very close to OpenGL. Close enough that I would prototype graphics code using a c compiler and OpenGL on windows. Moving the code over most of the time took little to no modifications.
"When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
Only 5 1/2 months after NVidia added support for OpenGL 3.0. Google it. http://www.electronista.com/articles/08/08/14/nvidia.supports.opengl.3/
If they ignore the xbox segment, they lose a lot of customers, so the game companies (EA, I'm looking at you) just _have_ to write for xbox. So then they're already coding to DirectX, so they just port it over to Windows.
Then why don't the Windows versions of Windows/Xbox 360 dual platform games support, say, multiple gamepads even if the Xbox 360 version does? Media center PCs tend to have big enough monitors to support this. But for some reason, major video game publishers ignore media center PCs, either dropping split-screen and requiring a network for PC multiplayer, or just skipping the PC entirely. They'd rather rewrite the entire graphics engine in OpenGL ES for PS3 and the GL-like GX API for Wii than port the existing DirectX code to Windows.
Anyone know what the cheapest card I can get that supports (or will soon support) OpenGL 3.0 under Linux?
How do you imagine they're going to play games on the Macs when half of them have the notorious Intel GMA "video cards", most of which still don't have hardware T&L (example: Intel GMA950 is still used in Mac minis and was until recently in MacBooks)? The other half of the Macs has outdated and non-upgradeable video cards. To illustrate: the most up to date video card you can get for the Mac Pro (most upgradeable and powerful Mac) is the Radeon 3870 or the NVidia 8800GT (both a generation behind the curve).
I don't think developers are going to take gaming on OS X seriously until Apple does.
DirectX 10 level? pshaw! When they support Linux systems, then I'm interested. ATI shot themselves in the foot years ago with me by not supporting Linux systems.
Disclaimer: The opinions and actions of the US Gov't are in no way representative of those held by this author or its ci
Of course that was running on Silicon Graphics hardware. Silicon Graphics being the primary pusher of OpenGL back then.
Occam's razor is the blind faith in the natural selection of least resistance and in universal oversimplification. -- EF
Would be helpful if cross-platform opengl code that works on Windows, Linux, Solaris, BSDs etc. worked on OS X. Unfortunately, there are so many weird bugs on OS X related to graphics, it isn't even funny.
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
It really isn't funny. Apple doesn't seem to give a rat's ass about gaming on OS X, so the only thing that works reliably are the core functions needed for their GUI, CoreImage, etc. If you actually try using half the GL functions that are usually reserved for games, you'll run in to all sorts of bugs. And sometimes you'll just run in to the fact that some of those functions don't even exist under the OS X drivers. It's a hell of a lot like working with a MiniGL driver from back in the 3Dfx days, except Apple dropped the wrong set of functions.
OFC if you have to port the game between 4 architectures, (directx,ps3,xdx,wii) it would be beneficial to seperate out the rendering code, which in turn makes it easier to port to openGL right?
Most devs worth their salt will wrap the raw API calls yes. I think the point you're missing though, is that from whichever API you approach the problem from, the wrapper layer always ends up looking very similar to D3D 10 - since it pretty accurately reflects what's available on modern GPU's.
The OpenGL 3.0 spec was supposed to end up looking a lot like a modern graphics architecture as well, but unfortunately, they back tracked at the last minute. The result is a pretty broken, fairly nasty API, where there are literally a 101 ways to draw a triangle. Every other API has just 1 method - and that's always the fastest available. If you've been using OpenGL for 10+ years, you probably have the experience to know which functions are redundant, and which functions are badly supported. If you're new to OpenGL, then god help you! The extension registry is roughyl twice the size of the new testament - That's a hell of a lot of man pages to trawl through.....
Yeah, AMD did when they bought ATI.
http://outcampaign.org/
It deserves a ha ha...