If TCL was added it would basically be an OpenGL driver. Why bother with Warp3D and MiniGL, just make a bloody OpenGL driver that OS4 has needed for 10+ years. No one cares about or needs Warp3D.

_________________

We should not wait for Galluim3D, it is better to optimize Warp3D and MiniGl

_________________
Amiga600/Vampire2/PrismaMegaMix

@CarasGhant

I care
And we are tired to wait for, If you think to have Mesa/Gallium tommorrow well you will be greatly disappointed ..

Better improve the current MiniGL/Warp3D that anyone can test and use for real, then if somethings better arrive ...

_________________
BACK FOR THE FUTURE

http://www.betatesting.it/backforthefuture

Sam440ep Flex 800 Mhz 1 GB Ram + AmigaOS 4.1 Update 6
AmigaOne XE G3 800 Mhz - 640 MB Ram - Radeon 9200 SE + AmigaOS 4.1 Update 6

@AmigaBlitter

Quote:

If the OpenGL port will coming soon, perhaps continue to on the minigl can be a waste of time.

I think it's best assume it isn't just around the corner, even if it was it wouldn't be a waste of time updating Waprd3D and MiniGL.

The Gallium drivers don't support R100 and R200 based Raeons but performance on those cards would improve if the existing APIs were updated .

Warp3D also provides lower level access to the hardware and applications using it directly run faster.

@AmigaBlitter
Quote:

Maybe you can join the OS4 OpenGL team?

You mean, help out in porting MESA + Gallium? Porting software from other OSes (especially *nix systems) has never been my strong point.


@CarasGhant
Quote:

If TCL was added it would basically be an OpenGL driver. Why bother with Warp3D and MiniGL, just make a bloody OpenGL driver that OS4 has needed for 10+ years. No one cares about or needs Warp3D.

By your own admission adding TCL to Warp3D (and updating MiniGL) would basically be "just making a bloody OpenGL driver..." IMHO, updating Warp3D would be easier than writing an "OpenGL driver" from scratch. As far as the OpenGL 1.x specification goes, I'd say that updating Warp3D would be easier than trying to port/adapt MESA's old DRI drivers.**

Hans


** Bear in mind what I said to AmigaBlitter above about porting from other OSes.

_________________
http://hdrlab.org.nz/ - Amiga OS 4 projects, programming articles and more. Home of the RadeonHD driver for Amiga OS 4.x project.
https://keasigmadelta.com/ - More of my work.

If Warp3D had TCL what would MiniGL really need to do besides translate different function names? Maybe its more complicated than that, I don't know. My point is Gallium is never going to happen, maybe the Warp3D driver could be fleshed out into a full OpenGL driver.

_________________

@CarasGhant
Quote:

If Warp3D had TCL what would MiniGL really need to do besides translate different function names? Maybe its more complicated than that, I don't know. My point is Gallium is never going to happen, maybe the Warp3D driver could be fleshed out into a full OpenGL driver.

It's a little more complicated than that, but not much. Warp3D would be to MiniGL what Gallium3D is to MESA; the underlying driver layer.

Hans

_________________
http://hdrlab.org.nz/ - Amiga OS 4 projects, programming articles and more. Home of the RadeonHD driver for Amiga OS 4.x project.
https://keasigmadelta.com/ - More of my work.

@Hans

If they haven't happened yet I would suggest it is time for frank discussions on the future of 3D on OS4.

Pick a route - get Gallium going or go route B by upgrading MiniGL/W3D. It is time for a choice to be made and a roadmap set. The drivers have now evolved to a point where the bottleneck is back at the 3D API.

I expect the reason for the Gallium taking so long is simply the huge amount of work involved - and the constantly evolving source code base. Being Linux-specific won't help much either.

Definitely a must-have topic for the upcoming DevCon at Amiwest.

Mesa can load non-gallium drivers too, and it has R100, R200, etc. drivers.
There is a difference between low level, and outdated. Warp3D is very ill-suited for modern (past-2000) graphics hardware. With today's graphics cards it's a huge bottleneck, and leaves most of the hardware completely unused. It basically uses massively parallel computing devices as 90s style triangle rasterizers. This is why implementing OpenGL on top of it results in a huge CPU overhead.
The bottom line is: the only reason to use Warp3D is its availability, and not its supposed superior features.

_________________
This is just like television, only you can see much further.

To me it seems we need RadeonHD+Gallium3D+OpenGL to fully use modern 3D chips.
RadeonHD+Warp3D+MiniGL is not enough to get more than 10% out of modern GPU.

or am I wrong?


btw. It would be nice to get info about Gallium3D development.
We read it's on hold untill x5000 initial drivers & AOS are done.

But what about something like...
50% of OpenGL driver done (SW renderer is done, HW support to be tested, multithreaded operation to be tested)
xx% of Gallium ready (of the first beta version)

I promise I will not shoot the messenger!

Last edited by KimmoK on 14-Aug-2015 at 10:21 AM.

_________________
- KimmoK
// For freedom, for honor, for AMIGA
//
// Thing that I should find more time for: CC64 - 64bit Community Computer?

How about Vulkan?

Kamelito

Unlike OpenGL, Vulkan would have absolutely 0 use for us.

_________________
This is just like television, only you can see much further.

Great work !

_________________
Rock lobster bit me. My Workbench has always preferences. X1000 + AmigaOS4.1 FE
"Anyone can build a fast CPU. The trick is to build a fast system." -Seymour Cray