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."

26 of 102 comments (clear)

  1. waiting game by Aranykai · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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?
    1. Re:waiting game by Bert64 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Depends whether their games target the Wii and PS2/PS3 systems as well... The install base of PS2 systems is huge and new games are still being made, and the Wii is selling very well. If they target OpenGL then everything but the xbox is an easier port.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    2. Re:waiting game by Ilgaz · · Score: 4, Informative

      Lets not forget the 10% approaching Mac OS X. While game developers may think otherwise, users _hate_ bootcamp to run games or Cider (Windows) games under OS X. Under OS X, native 3d is OpenGL.

    3. Re:waiting game by mrchaotica · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Ah, but this article is about a driver for Windows. Are OpenGL 3.0 drivers available for OS X yet?

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    4. Re:waiting game by Ilgaz · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I am almost sure Apple will be hurrying to implement them under OS X. OS X had very early OpenGL 2.x support, very silently with a OS X update. They try to use whatever available as you probably know, for desktop acceleration and CoreImage etc.

      Interestingly my low end NV5200 had OpenGL 2.x support just with a system update. While on it, here is the tool I get such details and benchmark/test them: http://www.realtech-vr.com/glview/version3.html

    5. Re:waiting game by robthebloke · · Score: 4, Informative

      Uhm. PS2/PS3 and the Wii do not support OpenGL, so not sure how you figure that's even an issue? (There is a truly awful OpenGL ES wrapper for PS3, but nobody sane would ever use it....)

      In actual fact, porting between GL3.0 and DX10 isn't that hard. It's all SM3.0/SM4.0 shaders that just need to be ported. Everything else is more or less createBuffer/createTexture etc. Porting legacy OpenGL code is a royal PITA though. There just aren't any equivalents for immediate mode/display lists/fixed function etc. Sadly, it's easier to port a DX10 app to GL than it is to go the other way around...

    6. Re:waiting game by aliquis · · Score: 3, Funny

      Oh no, Starcraft 2 delayed 2 more years ;) ..

    7. Re:waiting game by daVinci1980 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What the GP was saying is correct--most pstriple developers write the pushbuffer directly, instead of using the OGL:ES implementation.

      --
      I currently have no clever signature witicism to add here.
    8. Re:waiting game by BigBuckHunter · · Score: 3, Informative

      Uhm. PS2/PS3 and the Wii do not support OpenGL

      This is correct, though they both utilize openGL-esque APIs. Mesa wrappers are already showing up for the Wii.

      BBH

    9. Re:waiting game by samkass · · Score: 2, Funny

      It's not that hard to actually check, you know. The DS has about 500 games available for it, according to Nintendo. The GameBoy Advance has about 950 games.

      The iPhone currently has 17,367 total native apps available for it, of which 4,460 are tagged as games and 4,806 as entertainment (many of those are tagged as both). It's really no contest. Apple is by far the largest marketplace for handheld gaming, beating the DS by an order of magnitude. And I'm not counting web games (most of which don't run on the iPhone since Apple seems to hate Flash for some reason.)

      Like I said, though... a lot of those games are poor quality right now. But they're getting better fast, and downloads have doubled in the last month according to developers, so it's a growth market.

      --
      E pluribus unum
  2. Who cares anymore? by Akir · · Score: 2

    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.

    1. Re:Who cares anymore? by robthebloke · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In fairness ATI really isn't at fault here. OpenGL 3.0 was such a botched spec release, that most of us graphics devs (especially those who'd like to see GL regain some dominance) would like to see the Khronos group lined up against the wall and shot.

  3. Linux by phorm · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      OGL 3.0 drivers for linux came out in december.

    2. Re:Linux by RiotingPacifist · · Score: 2, Informative

      Give up on the closed source driver, apparently the open ones are coming along in leaps and bounds.

      --
      IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
  4. nvidia released OGL 3.0 drivers last month by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting
  5. Re:Lock In by nschubach · · Score: 4, Funny

    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.
  6. hmm by robthebloke · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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....

    1. Re:hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I really don't understand why anyone who isn't developing AAA games is using Direct3D or OpenGL.

      Sane people working on more modest 3D projects should be using OGRE. It's a joy to work with, it's fast, and it's written by really smart people who know OpenGL, Direct3D, and graphics hardware in and out.

      And if you *are* developing AAA games, aren't there high-quality, cutting-edge, cross-platform engines you can buy? You still need to know how the 3D software and hardware work. And you still have to write shaders yourself. But let someone else take care of the details.

    2. Re:hmm by Lord+Crc · · Score: 3, Informative

      Immediate mode is bad because it limits the driver from performing certain optimizations. The driver can't know that you always send it the same static vertices, so it can't, for instance, compile the shebang into an optimized triangle list which is stored in video RAM, eliminating the upload of the vertex data every frame. Instead you should use display lists or Vertex Buffer Objects (VBO).

      Fixed function is bad because almost none (all?) of the current hardware works like that any more. They will instead convert the fixed function stuff to shaders and use that. Afaik that will also limit the stuff the driver can optimize, and may result in a lot of unnecessary computations. Instead, use vertex and pixel shaders.

      Though of the two, immediate mode is by far the worst.

  7. Re:Lock In by robthebloke · · Score: 5, Informative

    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?)

  8. Awesome... by MostAwesomeDude · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.
    1. Re:Awesome... by MostAwesomeDude · · Score: 4, Informative

      Currently there are zero (0) devs working on OGL 3.0 support in Gallium, and one (1) dev working on Radeons in Gallium.

      "Months" is what we'd all like, yes.

      --
      ~ C.
  9. Re:cheap cards that support it? by Ilgaz · · Score: 4, Informative

    Hope ATI fans won't get mad at me but from what I read and watch, it will be a nvidia unreleased card. VIA/S3 started to do really interesting things too as releasing a DirectX 10 card and having Linux support pages for some products too.

    They (S3) say their hardware already supports OpenGL 3.0 http://www.s3graphics.com/en/products/desktop/chrome_530gt/ , I bet it works too... Issue is, there isn't any sign of Linux driver for it. See what I mean?

    The GPU supporting it is one matter, having a decent/supported driver on all systems is another. Drivers really, really matters. Let me give a example, on Tiger OS X (10.4) I get 130 FPS from same benchmark executable while on Leopard (10.5) which has way better kernel and OS architecture, system chokes to 50-60 fps. I still run Quad G5 (PPC) so I suspect lack of interest/time from Apple/Nvidia.

  10. Gaming on OS X? Not any time soon. by dusanv · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.

  11. Re:Lock In by Ash-Fox · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.