Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 34

Thread: OpenGL ES 3.0 Will Be Here This Summer

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,793

    Default OpenGL ES 3.0 Will Be Here This Summer

    Phoronix: OpenGL ES 3.0 Will Be Here This Summer

    While OpenGL ES 3.0 has been speculated about for months, the specification will be formally released by the Khronos Group this summer...

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

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    60

    Default

    It would be interesting if you could tell us what the significant changes are.

    I'd also like to know how this type of advancement could one day affect Wayland. Will they one day bump its requirements to ES3.0 or is that forever unessential for a compositor.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    62

    Default

    Based on OpenGL 3.2+ rather than 3.3, i wonder if this answers why beyond3D people are saying that DX10 style geometry shaders are not part of the spec (added to OpenGL in 3.3 i believe)?

    Why would they cut that feature out? over and above more complex shader operations, geometry shaders were one of the key functionality advancements that DX10 added over the old 9.x series......

    Does it also increase or decrease the likelyhood that PowerVR 554 series gpu's will be able to accomodate ES 3.0 (and whether PowerVR provides a driver to bring that support)?

    Finally, how long before we see mobile platforms actually embrace OpenGL ES 3.0 (such as android, QNX, IOS, etc)?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    166

    Default complexity

    Last time I compared opengl3 with opengl4, I think I noted than opengl4 was simpler than opengl3 for the good reasons. Regarding opengl ES 2, I though about it like it was opengl as it was supposed to be (for modern hardware and simple). Now saying that opengl ES3 will feature many elements from opengl3 scares me...

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,129

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jedibeeftrix View Post
    Based on OpenGL 3.2+ rather than 3.3, i wonder if this answers why beyond3D people are saying that DX10 style geometry shaders are not part of the spec (added to OpenGL in 3.3 i believe)?

    Why would they cut that feature out? over and above more complex shader operations, geometry shaders were one of the key functionality advancements that DX10 added over the old 9.x series......
    They were actually added as part of GL3.2. I'm guessing the reason they are being left out is they require a significant amount of hardware transistors for a feature that would rarely be used in a mobile context. With ES hardware you have to balance the cost to make the hardware and the power required to run it with any new features you add, and geometry shaders probably just didn't end up making sense.

    If they are left out, that will make ES3.0 a good target for Mesa to shoot for between GL3.1 and 3.2. They might be able to complete it for the January 2013 release and aim for more complete 3.2 support in the July 2013 release.
    Last edited by smitty3268; 05-27-2012 at 06:08 AM.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    62

    Default

    cheers, makes sense i guess.

    i see the logic, but i'm not sure that MESA compatibility is a serious concern for the ARB given that 99.99% of mobile devices run vendor supplied proprietary drivers.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    150

    Default

    What we really need in OpenGL is standardizations of some innovations from nVidia such as bindless graphics/textures.

    Jedibeeftrix:
    The most important "feature" of SM4(Direct3D 10 and OpenGL 3.x) was the architectural redesign to better utilize modern GPU architectures. I have hardly ever seen geometry shaders in use, so I guess they just take up too much space to implement in mobile hardware.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jedibeeftrix View Post
    Based on OpenGL 3.2+ rather than 3.3, i wonder if this answers why beyond3D people are saying that DX10 style geometry shaders are not part of the spec (added to OpenGL in 3.3 i believe)?

    Why would they cut that feature out? over and above more complex shader operations, geometry shaders were one of the key functionality advancements that DX10 added over the old 9.x series......
    The only reason for the existence of geometry shaders is that high-end desktop GPUs were getting so fast that a single-core CPU and PCIe 1.0 bus couldn't feed it small geometry fast enough. So instead some of the geometry can be generated on the GPU itself using a geometry shader.

    This is a pretty useless feature on an API for embedded systems because their GPUs are not very good at handling high polygon counts, and because in relative terms the CPU and the bus to the GPU is very fast.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    236

    Default

    Soooo... I'm gleaning from this discussion that once the latest OpenGL ES is equal to the latest OpenGL, then OpenGL ES will be superior for desktop Linux as well as mobile. Also, it would allow OpenGL to finally surpass or meet DirectX in performance and power consumption. I'm guessing that it would also make developing the open source graphics drivers easier because they will not have to spend so much time worrying about backwords compatibility.

    Is this correct?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    150

    Default

    No, it is similar to 3.2 with some features missing.

    The OpenGL performance with nVidia is already on par with Direct3D, draw-calls are even a little bit faster. As I mentioned earlier, the OpenGL specifications can benefit from adopting some nVidia extensions such as bindless graphics, which theoretically can boost VBO performance up to 7.5x, which might improve the real world performance 50-100% on heavy VBO workloads.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •