Graphics HW Accelearton : Any Progress?

kode54 · Post by **kode54** » Fri Jun 18, 2004 12:46 am

Not if it helps with accelerating all those fancy GUI effects that are currently rendered entirely in software executed on the PPC side. Wrapping PPC-side extensions to host side APIs will require a proper driver to pass the implemented function calls up to the emulator, or something like that.

Hmm, though, from the wiki, it would appear that a proper client side kernel driver wrapper will not require video.x.

brannoch · Post by **brannoch** » Fri Jun 18, 2004 5:19 am

I don't have a "recent 3D Graphics accelerator", a "new age video card" or even a "fairly recent system". I am running PearPC on systems that wouldn't even be considered bottom-of-the-line by modern standards, and all of them have onboard video. The extent that they are 3D hardware accelerated at all is to DirectX 7 level. Their only OpenGL support is the default driver included with Windows XP that does the GL functions in software. Carmack would laugh at every working piece of hardware in my house, but that's OK because I don't play video games.

Oh and by the way, PearPC runs just fine on my systems, thanks.

One of my non-working systems that could be repaired would be pretty capable - it was fairly decent a couple of years ago. Until then I have to make do with what I have, a collection of gift and barter computers. I haven't needed to buy a computer for years now, just the occasional part.

kybernaut · Post by **kybernaut** » Fri Jun 18, 2004 9:47 am

[wrong thread, nevermind]

bonehead · Post by **bonehead** » Fri Jun 18, 2004 1:18 pm

brannoch wrote: Their only OpenGL support is the default driver included with Windows XP that does the GL functions in software.

What on-baord video is it?

CaptainValor · Post by **CaptainValor** » Fri Jun 18, 2004 2:07 pm

Dude, even a $35 bottom-of-the-line graphics card today has OpenGL support. If PearPC does go the OpenGL route, it's not that big an investment to make.

Jackalo · Post by **Jackalo** » Fri Jun 18, 2004 3:20 pm

I hate OpenGL. DirectX rendering looks so much better.

OpenGL just looks blocky to me. Especially in CounterStrike.

lilmul123 · Post by **lilmul123** » Fri Jun 18, 2004 4:53 pm

OMG! OpenGL looks so much cleaner on Counterstrike! DirectX is all washed out.

kode54 · Post by **kode54** » Fri Jun 18, 2004 6:21 pm

Windows NT bundled drivers do not include OpenGL installable client drivers, so of course it isn't accelerated. You need to install vendor-supplied drivers for that. Even then, if you have some old or really really cheap video chipset, you won't get full support from vendor drivers.

OGM! I think I smell a troll!

sardaukar_siet · Post by **sardaukar_siet** » Mon Jun 21, 2004 8:19 am

Bah. These OGL/DX discussions are non-discussions. Basically, OGL rocks but it's generally poorly implemented. DX as a concept (graphics platform and much more) is cool, and is backed by M$, and thus by every other corporation in the world. And I for one believe that OpenGL still lives only because of Carmack and the very small Linux gaming crowd. So, even if OpenGL is the best graphics platform in the world, hardware vendors look the other way and put their effort in implementing DirectX correctly and that's why *good* OpenGL boards are very hard to find. Ultimately, your mileage may vary, pure and simple.

charnov · Post by **charnov** » Mon Jun 21, 2004 6:28 pm

OpenGL prtty much dominates the professional market (CAD, broadcasting, movies, etc.), but has fallen out of favor with the MS because, well, DirectX is easier to program for. The equivalent to directx on the (old) mac would be Quicktime (it is a multimedia layer also with sound, network, IO, video, stills, etc.). OS X, however, makes extensive use of OpenGL in the GUI and it would be prudent to make an OpenGL driver as it is a heck of a lot easier to translate OSX OpenGL calls, switch the endiness and output to an OpenGL driver in windows than to rewrite the entire DirectX suite for OS X.

I think every one should be able to see the problem here. OpenGL = cross platform and already in Linux, Windows, and OS X. DirectX = only exists in windows and is proprietary and closed source.

Oh, almost all current video cards have basic OpenGL in hardware. Some of the newer ones (especially Quadros) have OpenGL 1.4 in hardware.

robojam · Post by **robojam** » Mon Jun 21, 2004 6:44 pm

I think the fact that it is not open source is the biggest hurdle to using DirectX. It doesn't really matter how much better it might seem to Windows users, it is pretty much impossible to develop with it except by using the API.

brannoch · Post by **brannoch** » Mon Jun 21, 2004 8:34 pm

What on-board video is it?

The Sony has an SiS 630, the Dell has an Intel 810e ("Extreme Graphics", who do they think they are fooling?).

Dude, even a $35 bottom-of-the-line graphics card today has OpenGL support.

Dude, if you haven't worked on a computer without an AGP slot you are seriously overestimating the bottom-of-the-line.

But seriously, an OpenGL passthrough version of PearPC probably won't be worse with the default software GL drivers than the non-SDL version is now. It'll even speed things up on decent hardware. So I've changed my mind: Go for it!

brannoch · Post by **brannoch** » Mon Jun 21, 2004 8:46 pm

I think the fact that it is not open source is the biggest hurdle to using DirectX.

Do you mean the libraries themselves, or the API headers? There are open-source-compatible DirectX API header files available to be used with Mingw and the standard headers can be used with VC++ with no licensing problems. All of the other C/C++ compilers for Windows come with DirectX support, as do most native compilers for other languages on that platform. Do you mean developing for platforms other than Windows?

robojam · Post by **robojam** » Mon Jun 21, 2004 8:58 pm

I meant that you don't get complete source code for DirectX as you would with other technologies. If you have a problem and you debug it and it disappears down the hole into the files that you have no source code for, there's very little you can do with it.

bonehead · Post by **bonehead** » Tue Jun 22, 2004 3:58 am

brannoch wrote:The Sony has an SiS 630, the Dell has an Intel 810e ("Extreme Graphics", who do they think they are fooling?).

The 810e supports OpenGL. Just grab the drivers from Intel.

The 630... guess you have a point there. I do remember that some of the older SIS chips weren't so good on OpenGL support... but then the "Direct 3d" support on them wasn't anything to hoot about.

Inferno · Post by **Inferno** » Tue Jun 22, 2004 7:53 am

well the cvs should get fixed today :D

CaptainValor · Post by **CaptainValor** » Tue Jun 22, 2004 2:18 pm

That came outta nowhere...

kybernaut · Post by **kybernaut** » Tue Jun 22, 2004 4:21 pm

Just read some interesting info about the upcoming PC emulator for Macintosh, Microsoft Virtual PC 7:

Yesterday in front of resellers and Apple and Microsoft representatives, took place in France the first demo and presentation of Office 2004 and VPC7.
We have collected info concerning VP7.
It was not possible to use VP7, because it is still unstable, but hereafter are some details:
- VPC icon has been modified
- Better support and management of peripherals (especially for USB)
- It will be noticeably faster than the previous version
- It should support dual processor system as well as G5-based computers
And the best for the end...
VPC7 should manage and support natively graphic cards, and that's a huge improvement and particularly good news. In this way, we can expect to be able to play PC games on a Mac, it will probably require a quite fast processor and a good graphic card. For example, DirectX will not be emulated, but directly treated, as on a PC, by the graphic card!!!
Something that we were always missing, but expecting, in the previous VPC version...

This means that it is technically possible!
http://www.hardmac.com/niouzcontenu.php ... 05-12#2089

--kybernaut

Inferno · Post by **Inferno** » Tue Jun 22, 2004 7:38 pm

i hope ppc will use the same method , then you wont even need a mac :D

CaptainValor · Post by **CaptainValor** » Tue Jun 22, 2004 11:08 pm

That's great news! Not just for the fact that it means PPC could one day pass video to the host graphics card, but also for the fact that VPC7 would eliminate a big excuse not to get a Mac: gaming support. Once VPC7 comes out, there really wouldn't be any big reason not to buy a Mac. I'm thrilled about this, as it would mean I could one day buy a Mac and still be able to play everything in my gaming collection.

lilmul123 · Post by **lilmul123** » Wed Jun 23, 2004 3:15 am

Ah, one of the few advantages of having M$ buy VirtualPC, built in DirectX support!!!!

lord_muad_dib · Post by **lord_muad_dib** » Wed Jun 23, 2004 3:05 pm

naaaahh .. the only point is...

programmin' and buildin' a decent directX application it's easier because microsoft provides good sdks that merge perfectly with their developement tools...

opengl is more difficult to use than directX because every gpu uses opengl api in a different way than the each others

a directX application is easy to develop but opengl one is prettier

so 90% of emulators... and games are developed using directX api

Flash · Post by **Flash** » Tue Jun 29, 2004 1:46 pm

brannoch wrote:
What on-board video is it?
The Sony has an SiS 630, the Dell has an Intel 810e ("Extreme Graphics", who do they think they are fooling?).

Dude, even a $35 bottom-of-the-line graphics card today has OpenGL support.
Dude, if you haven't worked on a computer without an AGP slot you are seriously overestimating the bottom-of-the-line.

Dude, did you ever heard about Radeon 9200 PCI, GF2-FX PCI, Voodoo5 5500 PCI etc ? And it's a big surprise for you - PCI versions of those cards sometimes even faster than AGP ones (especially early nVidia cards with DiME bug, which causes card to use AGP texturing even when enough onboard VRAM available)

Onboard video is total crap - shared memory, it's so sloooow, even old Voodoo3 or TNT2 PCI will be waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay faster in both 2D and 3D.

Marc · Post by **Marc** » Tue Jun 29, 2004 6:47 pm

Lets hope that Virtual PC for the x86 could use teh native graphics card in the same way in a future release. I for one would love to play some OLD games that just won't run on an XP system or were funny using the emulated S3 board in VPC.

I never thought I'd say this, but....here! here! Microsoft....unless of course you use Linux in your VM on VPC Mac.....

Graphics HW Accelearton : Any Progress?

OpenGL is for professional work