OpenGL 4.2 Released

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
[citation][nom]mister g[/nom]Didn't Nvidia disable a bit of OpenGL so that their old tech demos won't work on their graphics cards anymore?[/citation]
Um, why would they do that? Also has anyone heard anything about DX12? Microsoft always likes to release its new API along with their new operating system but of course since Windows 8 is going to be designed differently will MSFT keep that tradition?
 
[citation][nom]11796pcs[/nom]Um, why would they do that? Also has anyone heard anything about DX12? Microsoft always likes to release its new API along with their new operating system but of course since Windows 8 is going to be designed differently will MSFT keep that tradition?[/citation]

some rumor suggesting that windows 8 may come with DX11.1 instead of DX12. the rumor based on intel IGP that built-in for haswell based processor will featuring DX11.1 instead of DX12
 
[citation][nom]mister g[/nom]Didn't Nvidia disable a bit of OpenGL so that their old tech demos won't work on their graphics cards anymore?[/citation]

They might have removed depreciated functions. You can't support legacy stuff forever or your code/hardware becomes bloated to the point of unsuitability.
 
[citation][nom]renz496[/nom]some rumor suggesting that windows 8 may come with DX11.1 instead of DX12. the rumor based on intel IGP that built-in for haswell based processor will featuring DX11.1 instead of DX12[/citation]

What is the difference between DX11.1 and DX12 (other than DX0.9)? Sometimes a name or a number is just a name or a number.
 
[citation][nom]renz496[/nom]some rumor suggesting that windows 8 may come with DX11.1 instead of DX12. the rumor based on intel IGP that built-in for haswell based processor will featuring DX11.1 instead of DX12[/citation]
That could be like how Intel didn't update thier IGPs to support DX11 and instead went the DX10.1 route. They waited until their Sandy Bridge IGPs were released to support it. DX10.1 was just an incremental update to add some missing features until the new stuff came along.
 
[citation][nom]ralfthedog[/nom]They might have removed depreciated functions. You can't support legacy stuff forever or your code/hardware becomes bloated to the point of unsuitability.[/citation]
Like x86?
 
I'm having a hard time recalling any Windows based game using OpenGL that wasn't made years ago. It's a shame too because OpenGL is cross platform
and actually still can hold its own today. OpenGL is vastly under used than it should be and in my opinion is still to this day superior to Direct X

[citation][nom]ralfthedog[/nom]What is the difference between DX11.1 and DX12 (other than DX0.9)? Sometimes a name or a number is just a name or a number.[/citation]

It's simple really. A whole digit would require sufficient change to name something 2.0 for example. While something being 1.1 would mean that they made minor changes not enough to actually call it a complete new version.
 
[citation][nom]NuclearShadow[/nom]I'm having a hard time recalling any Windows based game using OpenGL that wasn't made years ago. It's a shame too because OpenGL is cross platform and actually still can hold its own today. OpenGL is vastly under used than it should be and in my opinion is still to this day superior to Direct X[/citation]


There is a reason people dont use OPENGL anymore.. its crap.. it use to be great back in the original halflife days when it was ya know better then the competition. Its open source nature of everyone wants their hands in the pie is crippling the API's progress to the point of irrelevance. Sure its good for well free and all good for niche stuff right now. But superior to DX? who are you kidding. Who cares if its open and free if it cant keep up.
 
[citation][nom]renz496[/nom]some rumor suggesting that windows 8 may come with DX11.1 instead of DX12. the rumor based on intel IGP that built-in for haswell based processor will featuring DX11.1 instead of DX12[/citation]
This makes sense if the next gen consoles are also DX11 based..
 
"The new version integrates shaders with atomic counters as well as load, store and atomic read-modify-write operations to a single level of a texture."

I have no idea what I just read. Atomic wha-? This thing is nuclear?! But... it's software. Or... is it ?

>sceptical cat is sceptical
>divided by zero
>inb4 etc
 
There is a reason people dont use OPENGL anymore.. its crap.. it use to be great back in the original halflife days when it was ya know better then the competition. Its open source nature of everyone wants their hands in the pie is crippling the API's progress to the point of irrelevance. Sure its good for well free and all good for niche stuff right now. But superior to DX? who are you kidding. Who cares if its open and free if it cant keep up

-----

You are aware that OGL is actually AHEAD of DX, right? I mean, ulike DX, they support DX11 features for XP. Unlike DX, developers still have the ability to use their own extensions and the like.
 
This makes sense if the next gen consoles are also DX11 based..

------------

1: The 360 is hte only non-Winodws environment to even have a DX layer.
2: No major release for the 360 uses the DX API for 3d graphics, because of speed concerns. [Remember that whole "DX is too slow" spat AMD had? This is where that came from].
3: Even the PS3, which has an OGL ES layer, is coded at a lower level via libgcm, which unlike its OGL implementation, allows direct access to the RSX framebuffer, greatly speeding certain applications.

So please, stop this whole "Consoles use DX" nonesense. Its never been true, but its been repeated enough where everyone thinks it is.
 
[citation][nom]EnFoRceR22[/nom]There is a reason people dont use OPENGL anymore.. its crap.. it use to be great back in the original halflife days when it was ya know better then the competition. Its open source nature of everyone wants their hands in the pie is crippling the API's progress to the point of irrelevance. Sure its good for well free and all good for niche stuff right now. But superior to DX? who are you kidding. Who cares if its open and free if it cant keep up.[/citation]

You do realize that features that even DX 11 added existed for years with OpenGL right? Also as gamerk316 pointed out it allows extensions.

Even if you prefer Direct X (assuming you have actually used it other than playing a game) you have to admit the existence of OpenGL at-least gives a option that stops a complete take over from Microsoft. So if you are willing to ignore the positives OpenGL has over Direct X at the very least you should not the importance of its existence.




 
These APIs don't matter. Stuffs gonna be coded directly to hardware eventually. I'm surprised it hasn't happened already given we have only two companies Nvidia and AMD.
 
@iwantamd7970
They don't do that because every piece of hardware is different.
You would have to code everything a thousand times (literally).
There are that many models new and old to support. And a lot of models don't have specification pages so you can't know how you should code stuff for those things this way.

API's that standardize stuff if done right don't actually have much/big negative consequences. They make stuff work everywhere is a much better deal you get than what you describe.
 
“OpenGL 4.2 has integrated feedback from developers that are shipping significant OpenGL-based applications and games, making for a faster, more capable API which will continue to evolve to meet market needs,” said Barthold Lichtenbelt, working group chair of the OpenGL ARB and director of Tegra graphics at Nvidia.

If they would only notice the anger/frustration/impracticalness about the absence of DSA = direct state access functions.
And would stop pushing state machine nonsense in new functions where it does not make sense.

 
[citation][nom]iwantamd7970[/nom]These APIs don't matter. Stuffs gonna be coded directly to hardware eventually. I'm surprised it hasn't happened already given we have only two companies Nvidia and AMD.[/citation]

Uhhuh and everybody will abandon every programming language but assembly. I mean there is only one x86 family after all. There is a reason why that API's like oGL and DX came out. It was so they no longer had to program ctm. Also just because you have the same manufacturer, their various architectures of the GPU's still means a pile of different hardware to code for.
 
There is a reason people dont use OPENGL anymore.. its crap.. it use to be great back in the original halflife days when it was ya know better then the competition. Its open source nature of everyone wants their hands in the pie is crippling the API's progress to the point of irrelevance. Sure its good for well free and all good for niche stuff right now. But superior to DX? who are you kidding. Who cares if its open and free if it cant keep up.
Click to expand...

Then can you explain why hospitals pay almost millions of dollars to set up powerful computers based on openGL ?? ^^
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom