Geometry Shaders / OpenGL 3.2 Finally Comes To Intel Sandy Bridge

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Geometry Shaders / OpenGL 3.2 Finally Comes To Intel Sandy Bridge

Those still using Intel Sandy Bridge hardware on Linux will be ecstatic to learn this morning that geometry shaders support has been implemented in Mesa by a new patch-set for this older Intel hardware and thereby allowing OpenGL 3.2 support to be exposed for this "Gen6" hardware...

http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTc2MzA

[pipe13]

Those still using Intel Sandy Bridge... older Intel hardware

Still using... older hardware. When PTS benchmakrs show my "ancient" 2500k cpu benches less than 97 percent of its New! Improved!! Now with even more Intel Inside!!! younger siblings, guess its time to kick the old dog to the curb

(But thanks for the article -- glad to know there's still love at the shelter!)

[gufide]

AH! Finally!
No more using bumblebee for my projects!

[_SXX_]

This is great news and it's mean that Linux drivers for SNB going to be more advanced than Windows one except lack of GL_ARB_compatibility. E.g latest Windows drivers only support 3.1 core profile too.

[AJenbo]

Looks like Mac gets OpenGL 3.3 on sandy bridge.

[johnc]

This is embarrassing for Intel, and they don't seem too committed to supporting their products for any more than, what, a year?

Sandy Bridge is hardly legacy hardware when you consider just how frequently Intel is putting out new CPUs.

I think I'll stick with a real graphics vendor like nvidia. At least they know how to support their products.

[My8th]

Any linux games that support or will support geometry shaders? And what will the performance be like with it on Sandy Bridge GPUs?

[axfelix]

I didn't think it was appallingly negligent by Intel in the first place as the HD 3000 does have very obvious compute limits. I keep planning on going out and getting a GTX 760 or something for the 2500k box I've been using for a couple of years but I still haven't quite seen the need as most of the games I've wanted to play over that time period are smaller / quirkier titles without a huge graphical load. This is a good development purely insofar as is nudges up the rough minimum that these games might target (as I've noticed that's sat around 3.1 lately) due to the prevalence of Intel/Mesa drivers these days.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but 3.3 isn't that hard to reach with 3.2 out of the way, is it?

[gufide]

This is embarrassing for Intel, and they don't seem too committed to supporting their products for any more than, what, a year?

Sandy Bridge is hardly legacy hardware when you consider just how frequently Intel is putting out new CPUs.

I think I'll stick with a real graphics vendor like nvidia. At least they know how to support their products.

What? you mean supporting their product by developing only on their side with proprietary drivers and proprietary opengl? With never coming with a real working optimus on linux, leaving nvidia costumer with only their intel card or battery drain with tearing? By not supporting mesa? By refusing releasing documentation for Nouveau developpers? I think NVidia don't know really what is supporting their devices. They made it work. Final.

[johnc]

What? you mean supporting their product by developing only on their side with proprietary drivers and proprietary opengl? With never coming with a real working optimus on linux, leaving nvidia costumer with only their intel card or battery drain with tearing? By not supporting mesa? By refusing releasing documentation for Nouveau developpers? I think NVidia don't know really what is supporting their devices. They made it work. Final.

My Fermi card supported OpenGL 4.5 within 30 minutes of announcement.

But thanks for your opinion though.