Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Intel Does Hardware Context Support For Ironlake

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,780

    Default Intel Does Hardware Context Support For Ironlake

    Phoronix: Intel Does Hardware Context Support For Ironlake

    Intel's Ironlake hardware may be very old and not nearly as nice as the latest generation Haswell parts, but shipped today was a new patch-set for implementing hardware context support...

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

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    91

    Thumbs up

    Thanks!! *THUMBS UP*

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    373

    Default

    No, 3 years is not “very old”. Glad to at last see something for my processor. What does this improve concretely?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Hillsboro, Oregon
    Posts
    136

    Default

    Hardware contexts make it much easier to implement transform feedback features, which are necessary for OpenGL 3.0 (and just generally useful!). They also make a few optimizations possible.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stqn View Post
    No, 3 years is not “very old”. Glad to at last see something for my processor. What does this improve concretely?
    My thought exactly. I've seen much older hardware and I intend to keep my current one running for at least that long (probably even longer as a secondary box I carry around). Though I don't have anything from this generation, I hope these improvements will also be common when my primary rig becomes that old.

    Adding to this, each new generation of Intel CPU's seems to require a new socket, so there is virually no upgrad path there. Seeing that graphics is the chokepint in my rig (HD4000) I'd definately like to see at least software improvements to it.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    446

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kayden View Post
    Hardware contexts make it much easier to implement transform feedback features, which are necessary for OpenGL 3.0 (and just generally useful!). They also make a few optimizations possible.
    What's still missing for Ironlake to have OpenGL 3.0? I know there's MSAA which the hardware isn't capable of, but besides that, how far is the driver? And how far can the hardware go in terms of GL versions (ignoring MSAA)?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Hillsboro, Oregon
    Posts
    136

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gusar View Post
    What's still missing for Ironlake to have OpenGL 3.0? I know there's MSAA which the hardware isn't capable of, but besides that, how far is the driver? And how far can the hardware go in terms of GL versions (ignoring MSAA)?
    As far as I know, for OpenGL 3.0 there's two parts left (excluding MSAA):
    - GLSL 1.30 support (interpolation qualifiers and gl_ClipDistance)
    - Transform feedback

    Chris Forbes has patches on the mailing list for handling interpolation qualifiers, and I know he's been working on gl_ClipDistance support. I believe he plans to look into transform feedback eventually, too.

    I haven't thought much past 3.0, really. I believe 3.1 support would be pretty trivial. 3.2 and 3.3 might be possible, but I'm somewhat skeptical. The hardware definitely can't do 4.x.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    26

    Default

    If you could weasel out of ARB_texture_multisample same as the 3.0 MSAA requirement, everything else in 3.2 might be doable.

Posting Permissions

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