| |||||||||||||
Seeking Enlightenment (The H)Seeking Enlightenment (The H)Posted Nov 1, 2012 23:08 UTC (Thu) by butlerm (subscriber, #13312)Parent article: Seeking Enlightenment (The H)
If the performance advantage to be gained by using OpenGL for 2D graphics is so small, why does anyone bother using such a baroque interface for 2D in the first place?
If applications can really benefit from hardware accelerated 2D, why not have drivers implement something actually designed for the purpose, like OpenVG?
(Log in to post comments)
Seeking Enlightenment (The H) Posted Nov 2, 2012 16:23 UTC (Fri) by HelloWorld (guest, #56129) [Link]
There is an OpenVG state tracker for Gallium3D-based drivers:
http://www.mesa3d.org/openvg.html
The proprietary drivers as well as the open source Intel driver don't support Gallium3D though, so I'm not sure how useful that is.
Seeking Enlightenment (The H) Posted Nov 2, 2012 17:32 UTC (Fri) by HelloWorld (guest, #56129) [Link]
Actually, that state tracker doesn't seem to work with any actual hardware driver.
http://www.x.org/wiki/GalliumStatus What a shame...
Seeking Enlightenment (The H) Posted Nov 2, 2012 22:29 UTC (Fri) by johnny (guest, #10110) [Link]
Come to think of it, if 2d raster operations can be done so fast in software, why not make a virtual gfx card driver so that desktops and other software that don't explicitly support software rendering can still work on lesser hardware?
Seeking Enlightenment (The H) Posted Nov 2, 2012 22:31 UTC (Fri) by johnny (guest, #10110) [Link]
... which is probably what you meant.
Seeking Enlightenment (The H) Posted Nov 2, 2012 22:51 UTC (Fri) by raven667 (subscriber, #5198) [Link]
It's funny that you mention that because that's what llvmpipe _is_.
|
|||||||||||||