Second Life Forums Archive

paulie Femto

Into the dark

Join date: 13 Sep 2003

Posts: 1,098

12-23-2004 23:41

To what extent does SL use OpenGL 2.0 features?

_____________________

REUTERS on SL: "Thirty-five thousand people wearing their psyches on the outside and all the attendant unfettered freakishness that brings."

Huns Valen

Don't PM me here.

Join date: 3 May 2003

Posts: 2,749

12-24-2004 00:35

0% AFAIK

_____________________

[ huns? || words || 1TBS KREW || VHI Aircraft || Whitepaper on Aircraft Physics ]

Make yourself and your objects immune to llPushObject().

Adam Zaius

Deus

Join date: 9 Jan 2004

Posts: 1,483

12-24-2004 01:04

Most graphics cards (all consumer cards) cannot take advantage of OpenGL 2.0 yet, Give it at least 12 months before there's full support & compatibility.

-Adam

_____________________

Co-Founder / Lead Developer
GigasSecondServer

paulie Femto

Into the dark

Join date: 13 Sep 2003

Posts: 1,098

tests

12-24-2004 09:56

Here are some test apps that give an idea of how well a particular graphics card handles OpenGL 2.0. The first app tells me that my shiny new Nvidia Geforce 6800 only has 85% support for OpenGL 2.0. Sad. Some of the tests make my pc crash and reboot. My card seems to handle the second app better, except for the particle tests, which bring my 6800 to it's knees. Lol.

Supposedly, a new rendering engine is coming for SL next year. Will it use OpenGL 2.0 features? Lindens, what say you?

http://www.realtech-vr.com/glview/

http://developer.3dlabs.com/openGL2/downloads/

_____________________

REUTERS on SL: "Thirty-five thousand people wearing their psyches on the outside and all the attendant unfettered freakishness that brings."

Huns Valen

Don't PM me here.

Join date: 3 May 2003

Posts: 2,749

12-25-2004 00:11

I bet they are on 1.5 now and staying 1.x for at least 1.5-2 years

_____________________

[ huns? || words || 1TBS KREW || VHI Aircraft || Whitepaper on Aircraft Physics ]

Make yourself and your objects immune to llPushObject().

JC Case

Registered User

Join date: 26 Dec 2004

Posts: 11

12-28-2004 18:09

Alright, I don't get something . . . how do you 85% support a video feature? I don't think I like video card marketers.

Also, huns, it's wrong to throw people out of windows. And if you throw them back in, have you fenestrated them?

Max Mandala

Member

Join date: 31 Oct 2003

Posts: 19

12-31-2004 16:15

Since SL doesn't even use shaders at the moment I see no reason whatsoever why it should need any OpenGL 2.0 feature. Also, most OpenGL 2.0 features are available as 1.x extensions.

paulie Femto

Into the dark

Join date: 13 Sep 2003

Posts: 1,098

Linden input?

01-07-2005 13:31

Lindens? Any input on this one?

_____________________

REUTERS on SL: "Thirty-five thousand people wearing their psyches on the outside and all the attendant unfettered freakishness that brings."

Catherine Omega

Geometry Ninja

Join date: 10 Jan 2003

Posts: 2,053

01-07-2005 15:17

From: JC Case

Alright, I don't get something . . . how do you 85% support a video feature? I don't think I like video card marketers.

Okay, let's devise a communications protocol:
1.0 If one of us asks the other a question, the reply can be either "yes" or "no".

Now, let's revise it:
1.1 The reply can now be "yes", "no", or "maybe".

...and a second revision:
1.2 Error messages consisting of, "that's not a 'yes or no' question." and "I don't understand." are now available.

Now, say we want to follow this spec -- If I ask you "where are you?", clearly not a "yes or no" question, the response with version 1.2 of the protocol will be one of the two error messages. If I've only half-implemented the 1.2 extensions, it might be a poor choice of error messages as well. "I don't understand" might be the only one available. With versions 1.0 and 1.1, there will either be an internal error, resulting in NO reply, or the reply will not make any sense given the context of the question asked.

Basically, this is the problem with many communications protocols -- that one piece of software will meet many of the criteria, but it won't be a full implementation of the specification. Concequently, interoperability is frequently broken, even in some very, very small way.

That's what much of the ATI/Nvidia/SL wackiness has been about. SL meets the OpenGL specs, it's just that when it attempts to talk to the video drivers, they have absolutely no idea what SL is asking, because the driver programmers have spent all their time implementing features for John Carmack.

_____________________

Need scripting help? Visit the LSL Wiki!
Omega Point - Catherine Omega's Blog

Tread Whiplash

Crazy Crafter

Join date: 25 Dec 2004

Posts: 291

....Or....

01-07-2005 22:48

Or they have spent all their time devising "cool looking features" for their Marketting departments. Remember 3DFX's dying days anyone - and all their "motion blur" and "T-Buffer" effects?

At least when Carmack gets on the video-card maker's case, its to implement a real, useable feature in an honest-to-god product!

Of course, I'm biased - I used to work at Sierra, so I'm apt to side with developers. *chuckle*

Now, since we brought up Carmack - let me point out that Doom3, a 2004 release, was using the GeForce 1 as a bare baseline bottom-of-the-barrel card where feature compatability was concerned, right? The GeForce 1 came out in 2000 IIRC, so we're talking about a 3 - 4 year lag time folks, between features and their full use. Why? Because it takes time:
Time to implement the features in the drivers,
Time for game-programmers to learn how to take advantage of them,
Time for a product to be made,
And (most importantly) Time for the market to become saturated with these feature-capable cards enough so that when you go to retail, you have a decent market for your software!

The OpenGL 2.0 spec is less than 6 months old. Unless we suddenly see drivers from nVidia & ATI that are over 90% compatible with the spec, we won't see major titles using it. My prediction is that, barring a sudden implementation on EXISTING HARDWARE by the afore-mentioned manufacturers, it will be at least 1 year from now that we will see any "consumer level" products using OpenGL 2.0 extensively.

Take care,

--Noel "HB" Wade
(Tread Whiplash)

Welcome to the Second Life Forums Archive

OpenGL 2.0?

OpenGL 2.0?
paulie Femto Into the dark Join date: 13 Sep 2003 Posts: 1,098	12-23-2004 23:41 To what extent does SL use OpenGL 2.0 features? _____________________ REUTERS on SL: "Thirty-five thousand people wearing their psyches on the outside and all the attendant unfettered freakishness that brings."
Huns Valen Don't PM me here. Join date: 3 May 2003 Posts: 2,749	12-24-2004 00:35 0% AFAIK _____________________ [ huns? \|\| words \|\| 1TBS KREW \|\| VHI Aircraft \|\| Whitepaper on Aircraft Physics ] Make yourself and your objects immune to llPushObject().
Adam Zaius Deus Join date: 9 Jan 2004 Posts: 1,483	12-24-2004 01:04 Most graphics cards (all consumer cards) cannot take advantage of OpenGL 2.0 yet, Give it at least 12 months before there's full support & compatibility. -Adam _____________________ Co-Founder / Lead Developer GigasSecondServer
paulie Femto Into the dark Join date: 13 Sep 2003 Posts: 1,098	tests 12-24-2004 09:56 Here are some test apps that give an idea of how well a particular graphics card handles OpenGL 2.0. The first app tells me that my shiny new Nvidia Geforce 6800 only has 85% support for OpenGL 2.0. Sad. Some of the tests make my pc crash and reboot. My card seems to handle the second app better, except for the particle tests, which bring my 6800 to it's knees. Lol. Supposedly, a new rendering engine is coming for SL next year. Will it use OpenGL 2.0 features? Lindens, what say you? http://www.realtech-vr.com/glview/ http://developer.3dlabs.com/openGL2/downloads/ _____________________ REUTERS on SL: "Thirty-five thousand people wearing their psyches on the outside and all the attendant unfettered freakishness that brings."
Huns Valen Don't PM me here. Join date: 3 May 2003 Posts: 2,749	12-25-2004 00:11 I bet they are on 1.5 now and staying 1.x for at least 1.5-2 years _____________________ [ huns? \|\| words \|\| 1TBS KREW \|\| VHI Aircraft \|\| Whitepaper on Aircraft Physics ] Make yourself and your objects immune to llPushObject().
JC Case Registered User Join date: 26 Dec 2004 Posts: 11	12-28-2004 18:09 Alright, I don't get something . . . how do you 85% support a video feature? I don't think I like video card marketers. Also, huns, it's wrong to throw people out of windows. And if you throw them back in, have you fenestrated them?
Max Mandala Member Join date: 31 Oct 2003 Posts: 19	12-31-2004 16:15 Since SL doesn't even use shaders at the moment I see no reason whatsoever why it should need any OpenGL 2.0 feature. Also, most OpenGL 2.0 features are available as 1.x extensions.
paulie Femto Into the dark Join date: 13 Sep 2003 Posts: 1,098	Linden input? 01-07-2005 13:31 Lindens? Any input on this one? _____________________ REUTERS on SL: "Thirty-five thousand people wearing their psyches on the outside and all the attendant unfettered freakishness that brings."
Catherine Omega Geometry Ninja Join date: 10 Jan 2003 Posts: 2,053	01-07-2005 15:17 From: JC Case Alright, I don't get something . . . how do you 85% support a video feature? I don't think I like video card marketers. Okay, let's devise a communications protocol: 1.0 If one of us asks the other a question, the reply can be either "yes" or "no". Now, let's revise it: 1.1 The reply can now be "yes", "no", or "maybe". ...and a second revision: 1.2 Error messages consisting of, "that's not a 'yes or no' question." and "I don't understand." are now available. Now, say we want to follow this spec -- If I ask you "where are you?", clearly not a "yes or no" question, the response with version 1.2 of the protocol will be one of the two error messages. If I've only half-implemented the 1.2 extensions, it might be a poor choice of error messages as well. "I don't understand" might be the only one available. With versions 1.0 and 1.1, there will either be an internal error, resulting in NO reply, or the reply will not make any sense given the context of the question asked. Basically, this is the problem with many communications protocols -- that one piece of software will meet many of the criteria, but it won't be a full implementation of the specification. Concequently, interoperability is frequently broken, even in some very, very small way. That's what much of the ATI/Nvidia/SL wackiness has been about. SL meets the OpenGL specs, it's just that when it attempts to talk to the video drivers, they have absolutely no idea what SL is asking, because the driver programmers have spent all their time implementing features for John Carmack. _____________________ Need scripting help? Visit the LSL Wiki! Omega Point - Catherine Omega's Blog
Tread Whiplash Crazy Crafter Join date: 25 Dec 2004 Posts: 291	....Or.... 01-07-2005 22:48 Or they have spent all their time devising "cool looking features" for their Marketting departments. Remember 3DFX's dying days anyone - and all their "motion blur" and "T-Buffer" effects? At least when Carmack gets on the video-card maker's case, its to implement a real, useable feature in an honest-to-god product! Of course, I'm biased - I used to work at Sierra, so I'm apt to side with developers. chuckle Now, since we brought up Carmack - let me point out that Doom3, a 2004 release, was using the GeForce 1 as a bare baseline bottom-of-the-barrel card where feature compatability was concerned, right? The GeForce 1 came out in 2000 IIRC, so we're talking about a 3 - 4 year lag time folks, between features and their full use. Why? Because it takes time: Time to implement the features in the drivers, Time for game-programmers to learn how to take advantage of them, Time for a product to be made, And (most importantly) Time for the market to become saturated with these feature-capable cards enough so that when you go to retail, you have a decent market for your software! The OpenGL 2.0 spec is less than 6 months old. Unless we suddenly see drivers from nVidia & ATI that are over 90% compatible with the spec, we won't see major titles using it. My prediction is that, barring a sudden implementation on EXISTING HARDWARE by the afore-mentioned manufacturers, it will be at least 1 year from now that we will see any "consumer level" products using OpenGL 2.0 extensively. Take care, --Noel "HB" Wade (Tread Whiplash)