A very good news

_________________
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

Is it more difficult to "do" OpenGL on AmigaOS 4.1 than Windows?
My old PC is equipped with an old Nvidia GeForce 210 graphics card.
My old Sam460ex is equipped with an old ATI Radeon HD 4550 graphics card.

These graphics cards have similar performance it seems...
http://graphics-cards.specout.com/compare/25-44/Nvidia-GeForce-210-vs-ATI-HD-4550-Graphics
http://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GeForce-210-vs-ATI-Radeon-HD-4550/m7740vsm8944

The old PC runs OpenGL without any problem. That's why I wonder..?
I don't really have the money or reason to change HW all to often!

@Hans
Quote:

I'm surprised how many people have asked about Radeon 9000/9250 support; they really are too old and their shader capabilities are so basic.

It's not that surprising if you consider how many of us are stuck with motherboards, that don't have PCI-e slots.

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

I have no doubts about the skills and talent of Hans and the other people involved in this work in progress.

While we have hordes of Hollywood experts (soft skills), my real doubt is how many here are up to 3D graphics programming? And how many have time for OS4?

3D requires very strong and solid skills (math, physics, programming, ...).

_________________
SAM440EP-FLEX @ 733 Mhz, AmigaOS 4.1 Update 1

@BSzili
Quote:

It's not that surprising if you consider how many of us are stuck with motherboards, that don't have PCI-e slots.

I guess so, but I did expect people to be a bit more realistic. Radeon 9000/9250 cards came out almost 15 years ago, and their shader capabilities are really basic. AFAIK, the oldest Radeon cards to have (partial) GLSL support was the Radeon 9500.

Hans

Last edited by Hans on 24-Mar-2016 at 08:38 AM.

_________________
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.

@Massi
Quote:

While we have hordes of Hollywood experts (soft skills), my real doubt is how many here are up to 3D graphics programming? And how many have time for OS4? 3D requires very strong and solid skills (math, physics, programming, ...).

Once a game engine or two have been created/ported, then you won't need to understand vector algebra, physics, etc., in order to create a 3D game. Some programming skills will be required, though.

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

Quote:

Once a game engine or two have been created/ported, then you won't need to understand vector algebra, physics, etc., in order to create a 3D game. Some programming skills will be required, though.

Yes and no.
I believe even using an engine some understanding of what is going on is needed anyway.

But I am too "old-school" and maybe you are right

_________________
SAM440EP-FLEX @ 733 Mhz, AmigaOS 4.1 Update 1

@Hans

Like Doom with a different texture , there is many bad games made, that are just copy's of other bad games, using only the basic features of the game engines.

Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 24-Mar-2016 at 12:36 PM.

_________________
http://lifeofliveforit.blogspot.no/
Facebook::LiveForIt Software for AmigaOS

@Hans

Now that Nova is here how hard is it to port Vulkan to AmigaOS?

Kamelito

Last edited by kamelit0 on 24-Mar-2016 at 12:42 PM.

Quote:

The Warp3D Nova DDK comes with autodocs, a skeleton driver, and I've started working on a test suite that should make its way into the DDK too. I can provide copies of all the documentation that I have for Radeon HD cards, and also point to the open-source driver code that you'll need as a supplement to the documentation.

its pretty well understandable that you need to restrict yourself to a chipset, otherwise nothing ever gets done. i can imagine the amount of work only with this resting on your shoulders. that alone is certainly an achievement worth to be praised.

Quote:

I wish! I'm still very much working on the shader compiler and adding more features.

so the subsystem, as i suspected, isnt actually yet in the state o be delivered to users. well this fills well into the pattern of previous announcements, alas.

Quote:

The Warp3D Nova DDK comes with autodocs, a skeleton driver, and I've started working on a test suite that should make its way into the DDK too. I can provide copies of all the documentation that I have for Radeon HD cards, and also point to the open-source driver code that you'll need as a supplement to the documentation.

the problem is, that you and perhaps daytona appear to be only people left who remain to be able to contribute in this field. there might be some potential candidates out there, but they have either left or are in a different camp.

Quote:

Why using 50% CPU ?

whoaa? i must have completely skip on this. where does that come from? i mean if these simple examples(how many polygons are there all in all?) are burdening the system with 50% cpu usage i have a hard time to imagine such a system will be ever able to be enough for even a simple 3d game. optimization of your demo code may be a matter, but it simply shouldnt be that much of an issue, especially that the open source projects, that are potential candidates for the future ports are usually severely unoptimized, due to lack of hardware restrictions in a pc world.

Quote:

No idea. I'd certainly be happy if Warp3D Nova became a common standard. I only have time for one platform, though.

thats understandable. but since the sources are closed (for an understandable reason) a reimplementation from scratch would be necessary. i doubt there is interest on aros or morphos side, both have their direct opengl implementation and do not need low level standard such as warp3d, except maybe for 68k compatibility reasons.

aros contribs contain an older version of wazp3d,a replacement of alain thellier, i once intended to try to update, but these was no aros software to use it. actually it made sense just to try to run few 68k w3d, storm mesa or minigl demos on aros 68k in slow motion because it was all software renderer. now, i actually fear rather the opposite intention and likely subsequent result, by introducing warp3d nova. the standard common implementation of 3d subsystem, to allow easier porting and maintaining of 3d software for all amigoid systems will now become even more remote, not that it was a realistic option ever before.

Last edited by wawa on 24-Mar-2016 at 12:55 PM.

@wawa
while I'm agreeing with most parts, you forgeting the possible OpenGL ES 2.0 wrapper for the new Warp3D Nova.

Last edited by noXLar on 24-Mar-2016 at 01:52 PM.

_________________
nox's in the house!

@noxlar
no, im not forgetting this, but its a further piece that needs to be programmed separately and, while i trust daytona expertise in the field, the concept of a further wrapper may likely introduce further bottlenecks to already not very convincing performance witnessed with warp3d nova presentations.

according to the statement of hyperion director warp3d nova is not an update but completely different and incompatible piece of software from a different entity, which has so much to do with the genuine warp3d as it is also 3d related.

in this respect the question is again, why try to introduce a new standard that needs to be programmed from ground up, not to talk about the drivers for all the different chipsets, that also need to be programmed from scratch, if they are ever going to be available, and not to speak of an opengl wrapper that needs first to be added upon it to make it at all usable for a regular coder, if there is any left.

the whole point of porting gallium/mesa over was/or would be to circumnavigate these issues, there is obviously no resources to solve. but because gallium port is in hands of an entity that doesnt advance with it, warp3d emerges as suboptimal alternative without trying to take over the gallium project. well, it sounds like a sensible solution under the circumstances, nevertheless still pretty inconvenient.

Last edited by wawa on 24-Mar-2016 at 02:56 PM.

@Hans
Quote:

I guess so, but I did expect people to be a bit more realistic. Radeon 9000/9250 cards came out almost 15 years ago, and their shader capabilities are really basic. AFAIK, the oldest Radeon cards to have (partial) GLSL support was the Radeon 9500.

In my experience, users usually expect software to work on whatever machine they happen to own. On some level I understand, I mean they shelled out a lot of money for PPC motherboards.

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

@wawa
I'm impressed by the level you can pick and choose the quotes from a thread on another forum without including all of the posts.

For example you missed out the post from one of the EntwicklerX devs where he says he already gets at least 10x the performance from Nova as from (original) Warp3D on the same hardware...

See here 6th paragraph

Last edited by yoodoo2 on 24-Mar-2016 at 03:26 PM.

_________________
Happiness is mandatory.
MindSpace: MindMaps and UML diagrams for OS4

We ran 5 Recursion Computer Fairs before hitting the exit condition

if you are so precise then be really precise...

he tested one example from SDK, not more not less

it is faster for sure otherwise they would not have done it

the people with appropriate hardware including supported graphic card and willingness to buy everything will buy it. Many would have to buy a new graphic card or have no choice at all so not everybody is enthusiastic. But that is not my problem

@OlafS25
What's this, tag-team wrestling?

I much prefer dogs to cats, so I'm off now to the CatsAreUs forum to tell them how deluded they are.

_________________
Happiness is mandatory.
MindSpace: MindMaps and UML diagrams for OS4

We ran 5 Recursion Computer Fairs before hitting the exit condition

@yoodoo2
I'm not sure I'd say "impressive", but rather a sad indication of the state of multi-flavour Amiga forums. (If every Amiga flavour has people who (subtly or otherwise) bash the other Amiga flavours, then all Amiga flavours loose. End result: People give-up on Amiga entirely, and go find something more fun, like perhaps poking ones eyes out...)

Last edited by ChrisH on 24-Mar-2016 at 04:13 PM.

_________________
Author of the PortablE programming language.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue...

@yoodoo2
Quote:

I'm impressed by the level you can pick and choose the quotes from a thread on another forum without including all of the posts.

mmhm.. this is quite a short thread so everybody who actually understands german can read through for himself to judge. as a hint there is another out of context example, where a user states that under these circumstances gallium port is not necessary any more and cyborg simply comments that with a face palm.

Quote:

For example you missed out the post from one of the EntwicklerX devs where he says he already gets at least 10x the performance from Nova as from (original) Warp3D on the same hardware...

nice quote, likely out of context, apparently they ran one example scene with a single light source and without shaders usage. its not been mentioned if the polys were textured at all or flat shaded. however between 10.000 and 100.000 polys per second sounds around the performance of consoles like 3do these successors from mid nineties of the last century. or am i wrong?

Last edited by wawa on 24-Mar-2016 at 04:18 PM.

EntwicklerX did not say it is "at least 10x as fast"

I am german so I should know...

if he quotes german threads then he should know exactly what he takes from there

Cyborg has written that this new product has nothing to do with Warp3D and is very different. EntwicklerX has tested one example from SDK and it could show 100.000 polgons instead of 10.000, I assume it will very much depend also on the graphic card.

it is 10x as much polygons on the same hardware so it is right