Part of the Khronos Group
OpenGL.org

The Industry's Foundation for High Performance Graphics

from games to virtual reality, mobile phones to supercomputers

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 14 of 14

Thread: General question about OpenGL versions

  1. #11
    Senior Member OpenGL Pro
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,183
    Quote Originally Posted by stepasite View Post
    I want to support Microsoft GDI (default software OpenGL on Windows)
    You don't want to support Microsoft's software OpenGL.

    I'm not sure if you've actually benchmarked or even tested your program with this implementation - my feeling is that if you had, you'd be running screaming from it. It's a very very bad software OpenGL implementation, and I don't mean in terms of functionality (which is as good as one could expect for GL 1.1) but in terms of performance. This isn't going to give you, say, 50%, 25% or even 10% performance. It's going to give you ONE FRAME PER SECOND, even with a program as simple as the original Quake, and even on a modern CPU.

    It's 2014 - it's perfectly reasonable to say that your program requires hardware-accelerated OpenGL, and if a user doesn't have it you're not interested in supporting them.

  2. #12
    Junior Member Newbie
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    10
    No, I haven't mentioned that GL 1.1 renderer already exists, but it is not of big importance as I will have to code new features twice (if possible in OpenGL 1.1).

    I have mentioned in my first post that I do not want to end up with coding as many renderers as there are OpenGL versions. Having two rendering paths is reasonable for me.

    Thanks again!

  3. #13
    Junior Member Newbie
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by mhagain View Post
    You don't want to support Microsoft's software OpenGL.

    I'm not sure if you've actually benchmarked or even tested your program with this implementation - my feeling is that if you had, you'd be running screaming from it. It's a very very bad software OpenGL implementation, and I don't mean in terms of functionality (which is as good as one could expect for GL 1.1) but in terms of performance. This isn't going to give you, say, 50%, 25% or even 10% performance. It's going to give you ONE FRAME PER SECOND, even with a program as simple as the original Quake, and even on a modern CPU.

    It's 2014 - it's perfectly reasonable to say that your program requires hardware-accelerated OpenGL, and if a user doesn't have it you're not interested in supporting them.
    No, I haven't benchmarked GDI renderer, but I agree it is very very slow. But, still I want to support it. I think it is better to see something (e.g. via remote desktop) than being said sorry. And it is more true for very simple or static scenes.

  4. #14
    Senior Member OpenGL Pro
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,117
    I haven't benchmarked GDI renderer, but I agree it is very very slow. But, still I want to support it

    We still support GDI - it is a great backup for a lot of views but then the code has existed for years so we are not actually developing in GDI.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •