Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Conformant OpenGL 4.6 on the M1

rosenzweig.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 118 posts

Re: Conformant OpenGL 4.6 on the M1

#41

Post by breather »

malermeister wrote: post #33
breather wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, except for only working on xbox and windows, which pretty much destroys it as a viable direct target for modern games or apps. > Honestly, it would've been better to leave OpenGL to the legacy CAD vendors and standardize on Direct3D roundabout 1997 or so. If you remember what Microsoft was like in those days, the chances of D3D being standardized in a viable way on any platform but windows were about the same c…

Technically, also Linux (and probably other Vulkan platforms) with dxvk.

I had no idea this was a thing! Cheers.

Re: Conformant OpenGL 4.6 on the M1

#43

Post by simcop2387 »

breather wrote: post #40
wtallis wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They started with targeting older OpenGL to get a basic feature set working first. I guess from there, getting up to a more recent OpenGL was less work than doing a complete Vulkan implementation, and they probably learned a lot about what they'll need to do for Vulkan.

Ok, this makes a lot of sense—OpenGL sort of forms a pathway of incremental support.

Along with that, it's more immediately useful as it's used for desktops and compositers still, so getting a useful environment necessitates it.

Re: Conformant OpenGL 4.6 on the M1

#44

Post by zozbot234 »

jauntywundrkind wrote: post #16

> How do we break the 4.1 barrier? Without hardware support, new features need new tricks. Geometry shaders, tessellation, and transform feedback become compute shaders. Cull distance becomes a transformed interpolated value. Clip control becomes a vertex shader epilogue. The list goes on. I wonder how much of this work is in m1 gpu code, versus how much feature-implemented-on-another-festure work could be reused by…

More generally, you could execute complex OpenGL or Vulkan on some more-or-less arbitrary combination of CPU soft-rendering and hardware-specific native acceleration support. It would just be a matter of doing the work, and it could be reused across a wide variety of hardware - including perhaps older hardware that may be quite well understood but not usable on its own for modern workloads.

Re: Conformant OpenGL 4.6 on the M1

#45

Post by babypuncher »

pengaru wrote: post #21
cmovq wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t know that it was the only reason, but Carmack’s push for OpenGL certainly helped. A lot of things related to 3D games are thanks to doom and Quake.

> A lot of things related to 3D games are thanks to doom and Quake. Quake sure, but Doom? IIRC Doom is far more like Wolf3D's 2.5D/raycasting than the "true 3D" of Quake, it cpu rendered to a frame buffer with zero hardware acceleration. I find it hard to believe it made any lasting impact on any subsequent 3D rendering APIs.

Quake got official 3D accelerated versions like GLQuake and VQuake. The improved visuals and better performance these versions offered drove a lot of early 3D accelerator sales in the consumer space.

Re: Conformant OpenGL 4.6 on the M1

#46

Post by Wowfunhappy »

> Regrettably, the M1 doesn’t map well to any graphics standard newer than OpenGL ES 3.1. While Vulkan makes some of these features optional, the missing features are required to layer DirectX and OpenGL on top. No existing solution on M1 gets past the OpenGL 4.1 feature set.

I'm very curious to know the performance impact of this, particularly compared to using Metal on macOS. (I'm sure the answer is "it depends", but still.)

It's possible the article answers this question, but I didn't understand most of it. :(

Re: Conformant OpenGL 4.6 on the M1

#47

Post by badsectoracula »

ryandvm wrote: post #8

Kind of crazy to think that the only reason OpenGL was ever a thing for 3D gaming was because of John Carmack's obsession with using it for Quake II back in the 90s.

Fun fact: the earliest archived OpenGL site was a big "FAST GAMES GRAPHICS" banner with an animated Quake 1 graphic and a menu for other stuff :-P

https://web.archive.org/web/19970707113513/http://www.opengl...

Re: Conformant OpenGL 4.6 on the M1

#48

Post by badsectoracula »

cmovq wrote: post #9
ryandvm wrote: post #8

Kind of crazy to think that the only reason OpenGL was ever a thing for 3D gaming was because of John Carmack's obsession with using it for Quake II back in the 90s.

I don’t know that it was the only reason, but Carmack’s push for OpenGL certainly helped. A lot of things related to 3D games are thanks to doom and Quake.

It also helped that the API was actually user friendly compared to the earlier versions of Direct3D.

Re: Conformant OpenGL 4.6 on the M1

#49

Post by tarruda »

marcodiego wrote: post #10

"Unlike the vendor’s non-conformant 4.1 drivers, our open source Linux drivers are conformant to the latest OpenGL versions, finally promising broad compatibility with modern OpenGL workloads, like Blender, Ryujinx, and Citra." Looks like apple silicon are currently the best hardware for running linux and linux is the best OS for apple silicon machines.

> Looks like apple silicon are currently the best hardware for running linux

I wonder if this effort to run Linux on apple silicon will continue if snapdragon X laptops become mainstream.

Re: Conformant OpenGL 4.6 on the M1

#50

Post by eek2121 »

sho_hn wrote: post #14
marcodiego wrote: post #10

"Unlike the vendor’s non-conformant 4.1 drivers, our open source Linux drivers are conformant to the latest OpenGL versions, finally promising broad compatibility with modern OpenGL workloads, like Blender, Ryujinx, and Citra." Looks like apple silicon are currently the best hardware for running linux and linux is the best OS for apple silicon machines.

I would love for my employer to support that config at work. We have quite lovely Linux dev laptops, but the battery life of the M1/M2 machines in the IT shop is definitely enticing, and Asahi Linux gets closer to MacOS in that regard than you might think given the relative maturity and optimization.

It definitely isn’t ready for use as a daily driver. There are lots of bits missing (see below for an example) and power management isn’t great compared to macOS.
Post reply on HN