Poll: Is it time to upgrade your GPU !
You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
I already own a GL4/DX11 GPU Smile
93.18%
82 93.18%
GL3/DX10 GPU/SandyBridge with no plan to upgrade
5.68%
5 5.68%
GL3/DX10 GPU/Sandybridge but will upgrade soon
1.14%
1 1.14%
Total 88 vote(s) 100%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

OpenGL 4 dilemma
#31
I need to take a break and some vacations so don't expect a shiny GL4 renderer soon Wink

Crude reality:
* HW vendors don't provides new feature in older GPU (quite old for Nvidia/AMD, not really old for Intel). The free driver supports more extensions on those old GPUs...

* GL extension is a better API. New hardware (every year) => new extension => new possibility right now. DX is based on OS release (3-4 years). Because GL is a challenging API, all goodies from DX are incorporated in GL (possible with extension).

* AMD doesn't have any money to invest on the GL driver. I understand them it is a too small market. So the only solution is to do their job in the application. At least DX12/Vulkan will move half of the driver to the application. Performance of Vulkan/DX12 will be the same, it will only depends on the application.

* DX driver is really well optimized. In order to achieve the same speed, I need to implement complex behavior whereas a naive Dx implementation is really fast.

* The GL renderer wasn't done to replace Dx but to provide a nice plugin on Linux. The fact than GL is now better than Dx is an unexpected accident Wink
Reply

Sponsored links

#32
(08-19-2015, 06:16 AM)Blyss Sarania Wrote: The reason DX backend has fallen behind is not because we don't want to update it or anything like that, but because it simply doesn't support what we need it to.
DX pretty much supports most of the Opengl features, what particular ones are you referring to ?

Quote: It simply doesn't support doing the things we need to do in some cases.

why do you think so ? we do have HLSL Tongue2
We're supposed to be working as a team, if we aren't helping and suggesting things to each other, we aren't working as a team.
- Refraction
Reply
#33
Most != all => basically all blending stuff.

Other part (texture shuffle, depth support) can be done potentially. That being said, it might be easier to port GL code once it is done rather trying to follow me. Dev is quite erratic.
Reply
#34
Note: improving accuracy of Dx will also slow it down.
Reply
#35
(08-19-2015, 02:52 PM)gregory Wrote: Most != all => basically all blending stuff.

Other part (texture shuffle, depth support) can be done potentially. That being said, it might be easier to port GL code once it is done rather trying to follow me. Dev is quite erratic.

As i found Tongue Trying to translate your texture shuffling code back in the GoW2 fix days was a bit of a sod and is still hacked so it avoids it lol
[Image: ref-sig-anim.gif]

Reply
#36
Why couldn't GL4 behaviors be enabled with the usual checkboxes?
I mean.. why all of a sudden this obbligation?
Reply
#37
Whch checkbox?

So far most of the gl4 extensions are optional. It is nice for users but I need to maintain various code path. Code becomes more and more conplex. It requires also more testing for each combinations of extensions.

Various gl4 extensions are supported on older gpu. Honestly gpu vendors gain millions of $ yet you ask us to support missing feature of the drivers.

Last but not least, I can't use invasive gl4 features. Either architecture is adapted to gl3 or gl4. I hope dx12 will trigger an upgrade of the user gpu (4k marketing hype too)
Reply
#38
Not sure. It seems _most_ progress these days happens with the OpenGL part of GSdx, but the cut line seem pretty recent to me (haswell and better), so IMO this will throw a lot of users under the bus. Telling them "we stopped supporting you and you won't get any new fixes, sorry", is a bit harsh for anyone who didn't buy a system in the past 12-18 months (when haswell became mainstream).

Emulation is all about retro, and even if newer systems make things better, dropping support for not very old systems seems a bit.. well.. harsh.

OTOH, it's not me who's putting the time to make GSdx OGL progress, and I don't have any idea how many code paths this requires or how much maintenance effort.

I wouldn't have said that if you didn't ask.. but you did ask Wink
Reply
#39
I would just put a new renderer ogl => ogl 3.3 and add ogl 4.0. If you are on xp you can not use dx10/11. The same is valid for gpu supporting dx10/11. I think adding a new renderer but keeping the old one is the current policy of pcsx2.
Reply
#40
On linux it is sandy bridge and it supports most of the optional gl4 extensions. Why intel doesn't support gpu more than 1 years on MS whereas they get millions if not billion (seriously half of the cpu price is the gpu) of dollats. Reality is that openGL is limited to dx10 feature levels because Intel (apple too) don't give a damn about their users not us.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)