Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15

Thread: Intel Sandy Bridge Now Has OpenGL ES 3.0

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,407

    Default Intel Sandy Bridge Now Has OpenGL ES 3.0

    Phoronix: Intel Sandy Bridge Now Has OpenGL ES 3.0

    Intel's latest-generation "Ivy Bridge" processors with integrated graphics have already had OpenGL ES 3.0 support when using Mesa 9.1 with recent Linux kernel releases, but now the "Sandy Bridge" processors will advertise OpenGL ES 3.0 support too...

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

  2. #2

    Default

    Sigh... I'm still using my HP ProBook 4520s with Intel Ironlake graphics and no dedicated graphics hardware. I really wish Intel would stop neglecting users of this not-so-ancient chipset.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,024

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aliendude5300 View Post
    Sigh... I'm still using my HP ProBook 4520s with Intel Ironlake graphics and no dedicated graphics hardware. I really wish Intel would stop neglecting users of this not-so-ancient chipset.
    It's worse on Windows. For older hardware, Intel only has ancient & buggy drivers, very shoddy OpenGL support... there's a reason we just pop up dialog boxes telling users they're out of luck if we detect an Intel GPU being used when we create a device context, even on newer hardware, even when the driver claims to support what we need. I hear the FOSS Intel drivers are at least high quality and make some attempt at supporting more than the latest generation, so good on Mesa there. Intel is behind on feature support in Mesa, but is making a better product on Mesa than it does for Windows, as I understand it.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aliendude5300 View Post
    Intel Ironlake graphics
    I don't believe it's possible to support ES 3 on Ironlake. It just doesn't have the hardware necessary to support all of the features. New texture formats and new shading language features are probably the biggest roadblocks.

    OpenGL ES 3 can theoretically run on AMD/Nvidia chips from 2010 or newer, or on Intel chips from 2011 or newer. One year behind isn't so bad for integrated graphics. The difference is, Intel's drivers actually support it, there are no ES 3 drivers for AMD/Nvidia hardware yet.

    Intel really does a stellar job on Linux graphics drivers, they are far better than anything from AMD or Nvidia. The hardware is crap but I'd rather have slow hardware with good drivers than fast hardware with buggy drivers.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    505

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aliendude5300 View Post
    Sigh... I'm still using my HP ProBook 4520s with Intel Ironlake graphics and no dedicated graphics hardware. I really wish Intel would stop neglecting users of this not-so-ancient chipset.
    This!

    Ironlake is capable of OpenGL 3 (not sure about ES 3, probably not), but Intel has no interest to make it happen. At least they're upfront about it: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=59187#c1
    Last edited by Gusar; 02-23-2013 at 06:16 AM.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    716

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gusar View Post
    This!

    Ironlake is capable of OpenGL 3 (not sure about ES 3, probably not), but Intel has no interest to make it happen. At least they're upfront about it: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=59187#c1
    It's not actually true what you say.

    Intel (as company) do not have any interest in NOT supporting Ironlake advancment. It's more manpower shortage.

    I can not imagine any troubles Intel would give anyone from community to develop needed code (in fact I think Intel employes would help as much as time would allow). And docs are already there.

    But that is fate of hardware that is already on market when driver dev team still play catch up on the "current" and "next generation" front.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    505

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by przemoli View Post
    Intel (as company) do not have any interest in NOT supporting Ironlake advancment. It's more manpower shortage.
    Considering how many developers Intel employs, I'm sure they could allocate time for one of them to work on Ironlake if they really wanted. It's not so much about manpower, it's about priorities. Yeah, they're working on Haswell and ValleyView, which is great (I intend to buy a ValleyView netbook), but those two won't be on the market for a few months still, while Ironlake is being used now.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,158

    Default

    I hope to see OpenGL ES 3.0 support for Nvidia and AMD too!

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,587

    Default

    Now only if they could fix VA-API, then I could get rid of the GT-520's in the HTPC's.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    716

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gusar View Post
    Considering how many developers Intel employs, I'm sure they could allocate time for one of them to work on Ironlake if they really wanted. It's not so much about manpower, it's about priorities. Yeah, they're working on Haswell and ValleyView, which is great (I intend to buy a ValleyView netbook), but those two won't be on the market for a few months still, while Ironlake is being used now.
    Yes Intel have much more devs than AMD currently, but it do not mean that they can sustain hardware enablement for next gen, feature developement for next & current, and R&D (glamour, SNA, whatever), and support each and every previous generation. Well, they do for some of the work at least (e.g.SNA). But not for everything.

    Their Windows team is around 100 people for GPU driver (or so I heard), compare it to 20 for Linux side of things.

Posting Permissions

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