RSXGL: OpenGL 3.1 Support For The PlayStation 3

[phoronix]

Phoronix: RSXGL: OpenGL 3.1 Support For The PlayStation 3

According to a developer that began working on a PlayStation 3 graphics driver, which he's calling RSXGL, he reportedly got OpenGL 3.1 working from this Sony gaming console...

http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTE5MTg

[przemoli]

But now we have solution for it Homebrew to boot

GJ!

[DebianLinuxero]

Nvidia itself puts OpenGL 3.x support since 8800 series (DX 10 level support) and this freak claimed that he can do the same with a 7800 GTX.

No, I don't buy this.

[const]

this freak

Alexander Betts is not a "freak", but apparently quite talented developer and he did excellent job - actually performance bump without and with his work is really freaking enormous:

* without RSXGL: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22642664/expedite_psl1ght.log

* with RSXGL: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22642664/expedite_rsxgl.log

Nvidia itself puts OpenGL 3.x support since 8800 series (DX 10 level support) ... claimed that he can do the same with a 7800 GTX.

No, I don't buy this.

you maybe not buying it and if it's OpenGL 2.x or OpenGL 3.x doesn't really matter to me considering the performance improvement his work brought as per above numbers. also, no one knows what are the specifications of the "RSX" chip inside PS3 - it's just rumored that it's close to "7800 GTX", but no one except Sony and nVidia really know. in any case, what did Alexander Betts works and gives great performance - what better prove than that. last, but not least - it could be CellBE provides additional computational power to the "RSX" chip for what's necessary additionally to OpenGL 2.x in order to have OpenGL 3.x. so, do you "DebianLinuxero" happen to know those things for sure and based on that make statements?

so, thank you Alexander, keep going and don't be discouraged by incompetent Linux script-kiddies, calling you "freak".

[DebianLinuxero]

Alexander Betts is not a "freak", but apparently quite talented developer and he did excellent job

First of all, my apologize for been rude speaking of this man, Alexander Betts.

Sorry. I didn't mean to offend.

you maybe not buying it and if it's OpenGL 2.x or OpenGL 3.x doesn't really matter to me considering the performance improvement his work brought as per above numbers

Well, but this is precisely the point of the article : A programer, a man, a talented guy (put whatever-you-want except "freak"), claimed that a RSX could do OpenGL 3.1 with his driver.

Also, no one knows what are the specifications of the "RSX" chip inside PS3 - it's just rumored that it's close to "7800 GTX", but no one except Sony and nVidia really know. in any case.

The RSX chip today hasn't secrets : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSX_%27...Synthesizer%27

In any case, even if it keeps a little secret, what it's clear is that :

Independent pixel/vertex shader architecture

OpenGL 3.x and further need a chip that supports unified shader architecture by hardware.
This is true for nVidia chips, for AMD/ATI's, for Intel's ...

it could be CellBE provides additional computational power to the "RSX" chip for what's necessary additionally to OpenGL 2.x in order to have OpenGL 3.x. so, do you "DebianLinuxero" happen to know those things for sure and based on that make statements?

I really doubt it. I haven't seen an OpenGL implementation (nor Direct 3D) that by support of the CPU improved or emulated such architectural lack of features like unified shaders.

And I could say the same to you; you don't seem to know how the implementation is, or if Cell really matters, but you are wondering too.


Summary : I don't critiquize the effort of making a better driver, a more efficient or with much features/extensions.
Simply, I don't buy the OpenGL 3.1 claim of that man, cause the hardware architecture limitations.

[przemoli]

Dev in question do not pretend to implement whole OpenGL 3.1 core profile.

But to treat it as a goal IF hardware support it (and if mesa support GLSL 1.40 :P ).

On the github is STATUS file go and read it.



On the other hand OpenGL 2.1 =\= OpenGL ES, so there is no guarantee that there would be full OpenGL 2.1 on PS3 either.

[const]

The RSX chip today hasn't secrets : [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSX_%27Reality_Synthesizer%27[/url

i think we all are missing the point, because RSX doesn't even support OpenGL 2.1 - it supports "PSGL", which is "PlayStation GL" and it's subset of OpenGL for PlayStation. so, if Alexander Betts called OpenGL 2.x then it would be again wrong and probably cause people criticizing again. that's why i think what Alexander Betts did is support of "PSGL" as subset of OpenGL 3.1, i.e. it's not full OpenGL 3.1 and it's not even full OpenGL 2.x - it's just what's necessary for "PSGL" as subset of the highest possible OpenGL version. we all just miss too much knowledge to fully understand and i think Dave Airlie that commented earlier as respected Xord developer is not that familiar with "PlayStation3" platform and architecture too and judges from not entirely correct point of view.

[mememe]

Nvidia itself puts OpenGL 3.x support since 8800 series (DX 10 level support) and this freak claimed that he can do the same with a 7800 GTX.

No, I don't buy this.

The point Betts made is that he started out with a legacy free API. Some new features of OpenGL 3.x were supported by older graphics hardware and were therefore released as OpenGL 2.x extensions as well. Betts says that he hasn't implemented full support for all OpenGL 3.1 features (which as you say isn't possible) but he also hasn't implemented most OpenGL 2.x functionality that isn't in GL3 and is probably not available in the RSX anyway (mostly FFP support).

[airlied]

The point Betts made is that he started out with a legacy free API. Some new features of OpenGL 3.x were supported by older graphics hardware and were therefore released as OpenGL 2.x extensions as well. Betts says that he hasn't implemented full support for all OpenGL 3.1 features (which as you say isn't possible) but he also hasn't implemented most OpenGL 2.x functionality that isn't in GL3 and is probably not available in the RSX anyway (mostly FFP support).

So he's not implementing GL3.1 at all then. You can't leave half it out and call it GL3.1. How would any application know what to use? you'd have to write app specifically for it. Why not just mesa to implement GL2.1 + extensions, seems like it would match the hw and be a lot more useful, the nvfs driver already exists and could be reused for many parts.

Like people can do what they like in their own time, but he's really just invented a non-round wheel.

Dave.

[const]

... but he's really just invented a non-round wheel

in my native language there is saying that i will try to translate and i hope keep its meaning "even the God is speechless when the numbers are talking". so, "non-round" or not, the numbers in this case make enough of a statement about the work:

* without RSXGL: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22642664/expedite_psl1ght.log

* with RSXGL: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22642664/expedite_rsxgl.log

and before that the situation with PS3 in that area was pathetic. so, i don't get the criticism - it would be appropriate only in case someone did better job for the graphics support in PS3.