I found this linked on the Khronos website, it's a talk about how ray tracing works in Vulkan, and expectations that the cross vendor extension will be a superset of the nVidia vendor extension:
If you were building a car then DX11 gives you your choice of standard chassis, wheels and an engine. You just tweak it a bit and choose your colours. Vulcan gives you a big lump of metal and some basic hand tools - no concept of cars at all, just some very basic building blocks and you have to do the rest. Theoretically you can make the most amazing car ever, in reality you spent the first 100 hours re-inventing the wheel and are scratching your head where to go from there
Sort of disappointed with Vulcan.
I’ve been reading about all this great stuff Vulcan is going to do but nothing great ever happens.
Getting pretty tired of this.
If you were building a car then DX11 gives you your choice of standard chassis, wheels and an engine. You just tweak it a bit and choose your colours. Vulcan gives you a big lump of metal and some basic hand tools - no concept of cars at all, just some very basic building blocks and you have to do the rest. Theoretically you can make the most amazing car ever, in reality you spent the first 100 hours re-inventing the wheel and are scratching your head where to go from there
Excellent summary
I’ve yet to hear of a game that works better in Vulcan vs dx11.
Small thing but... expecting Spock etc to do more with a 21st century human made API is asking a bit much. Vulkan is and always will be a work in progress, they are trying to avoid the problem OpenGL had with being behind the curve and lacking quick adoption of features/tools.
Doom. The reality is it will take some time devs to adjust to Vulkan development, compared to DX's. DX is on the market for decades. Vulkan is just few years. There is not that much of experienced devs out there with Vulkan.Excellent summary
I’ve yet to hear of a game that works better in Vulcan vs dx11.
True to an extent, but far more so if you are writing an engine from scratch rather than using something like Unreal or Unity, both of which have, if not exact feature parity on Vulkan, then certainly close to it.If you were building a car then DX11 gives you your choice of standard chassis, wheels and an engine. You just tweak it a bit and choose your colours. Vulcan gives you a big lump of metal and some basic hand tools - no concept of cars at all, just some very basic building blocks and you have to do the rest. Theoretically you can make the most amazing car ever, in reality you spent the first 100 hours re-inventing the wheel and are scratching your head where to go from there
Hello computer?
Between the Unreal team, the Unity team, the iD team, the Valve/Source team, the DXVK/D9VK team, the ANGLE team, the MoltenVK team, all the driver devs out in AMD, nVidia, ARM, Qualcomm, Intel and the various OSS driver initiatives - not to mention several emulators now running functional Vulkan backends (Dolphin, RPCS3, PPSSPP, Cemu), and a smattering of Linux game ports from Windows (Feral), to name only the ones off the top of my head.Doom. The reality is it will take some time devs to adjust to Vulkan development, compared to DX's. DX is on the market for decades. Vulkan is just few years. There is not that much of experienced devs out there with Vulkan.
There is a tangible benefit to Vulkan over DX11 if the engine is properly coded - that is CPU utilisation, and therefore battery life if using a laptop.I’ve yet to hear of a game that works better in Vulcan vs dx11.
Something to also bare in mind about the explicit low level nature of Vulkan is that it allows the devs to be far more sure about the origin of software bugs, and how to fix them, and theoretically less dependent on the GPU vendors to optimise their drivers at launch time - in my mind that outweighs the increased effort of maintaining the gfx code.
ANGLE is working on a desktop GL front end for their Vulkan backend which already supports GL ES 2.0 and much of 3.0 - when it is complete it will make portable GL support a real thing, and something easily debugged by all given ANGLE's open source nature.Vulkan exists because of Khronos Group's previous standardization effort failures such as OpenGL/ES and OpenCL ...
Mobile hardware graphics vendors were not fans of OpenGL but what really killed it off was because AMD wanted to sabotage it as well since it wasn't a good match with their modern hardware designs ...
OpenCL died off for obvious political reasons. Nvidia and Apple later on didn't want to play the diplomatic game so AMD eventually killed it off as well since none of their customers wanted OpenCL as well ...
Vulkan was Khronos Group's only true success when no sane vendors in the future would ever support OpenCL/OpenGL drivers in any real capacity since they were effectively depreciated tools. The industry isn't giving many developers much of a choice so it was either extremely verbose APIs like D3D12/Vulkan or dealing with broken OpenGL drivers or falling back to D3D11 which had no new features. Heck, even Nvidia doesn't want people using OpenGL since they'll eventually want to stop maintaining millions of lines of code worth of driver hacks ...
To sum it up, OpenCL/OpenGL are huge maintenance burdens not worth supporting (no modern applications will use them) while Vulkan is significantly less of a maintenance burden and is gaining far more momentum than Khronos Group's previous APIs did so it's worth supporting ...
Some OpenCL code can be salvaged and run on Vulkan drivers using CLSPV - which Adobe have already done with code from their Mercury Engine from Premiere Pro so it can run on mobile platforms.To sum it up, OpenCL/OpenGL are huge maintenance burdens not worth supporting
Cleaner threading/CPU utilisation in Vulkan makes it much better for mobile use and battery life, I think Android is transitioning its UI to purely Vulkan presentation at least partly because of this.Mobile hardware graphics vendors were not fans of OpenGL but what really killed it off was because AMD wanted to sabotage it as well since it wasn't a good match with their modern hardware designs ...
Vulkan and Direct3D 12 both use Mantle, which was developed by AMD. The only real difference is that they rejiggered Mantle to be supported by all the GPU vendors rather than just AMD. Unfortunately, Vulkan's adoption has been almost entirely upon the shoulders of indie devs, whereas Direct3D 12 is used by the big studios.
Vulkan is based on Mantle, but only as a starting point to get the ball running at Khronos during its development cycle, which still took roughly 2 years despite that jumpstart.Vulkan and Direct3D 12 both use Mantle, which was developed by AMD. The only real difference is that they rejiggered Mantle to be supported by all the GPU vendors rather than just AMD. Unfortunately, Vulkan's adoption has been almost entirely upon the shoulders of indie devs, whereas Direct3D 12 is used by the big studios.
ANGLE is working on a desktop GL front end for their Vulkan backend which already supports GL ES 2.0 and much of 3.0 - when it is complete it will make portable GL support a real thing, and something easily debugged by all given ANGLE's open source nature.
DXVK/D9VK is already effectively doing the same for DX9-11, and some pre DX9 fixed function stuff too.
I wouldn't say AMD was purposefully sabotaging OpenGL so much as lacking the money for a decent team to properly maintain a fully featured AND slick driver - I've followed the Mesa development of RadeonSI/AMDGPU and it is a monstrous amount of code to get to OpenGl 4.5 (4.6 is still not fully supported even now by all but Intel), and that's before you start farting about with game specific opts/hacks.
From what I have heard is that Vulkan is mostly explicit in spec - whereas OpenGL is either mostly implicit, or enough of the spec is to make it a real pain to code drivers for, it's almost the opposite problem to coding Vulkan game engines.
Some OpenCL code can be salvaged and run on Vulkan drivers using CLSPV - which Adobe have already done with code from their Mercury Engine from Premiere Pro so it can run on mobile platforms.
In some ways Vulkan compute will supersede OpenCL given how prevalent Vulkan support has become, even to MacOS using MoltenVK.
Cleaner threading/CPU utilisation in Vulkan makes it much better for mobile use and battery life, I think Android is transitioning its UI to purely Vulkan presentation at least partly because of this.
D9VK is directly based on DXVK code, the main coder on D9VK does work in DXVK and vice versa - the plan is to merge D9VK in once it has gone far enough.D9VK sucks too BTW so only DXVK is the sane one out of the bunch
Like a red rag to a bull... Broken record much?The industry didn't want to end the tyranny of CUDA, they wanted freedom from OpenCL
Like a red rag to a bull... Broken record much?
CUDA wasn't even mentioned, I was talking about running OpenCL code on Vulkan.
The point being the end of OpenCL and the rise of Vulkan compute, which unlike CUDA is becoming largely ubiquitous with Android support, as well as MoltenVK allowing VK code to run a lot of it on iOS/MacOS platforms.
The new Vulkan backend coming for Otoy's Octane Render shows there is some real promise there too.
I don't expect anything drastically fancy on mobile, though I've no idea how complex the Mercury engine code is that Adobe ported - the Dolphin ubershader is another chunky bit of GPU code, but I've not heard anything about it since its initial debut, which was quite a while ago now, it might be interesting to see if th 8cx or SQ1 processors could handle it.but Vulkan on mobile platforms (MoltenVK included) has even more limitations
It has had quite a few extensions added since 1.1 and subgroups for various uses have popped up.Vulkan on desktop platforms is already inadequate for quite a few scientific applications
I don't expect anything drastically fancy on mobile, though I've no idea how complex the Mercury engine code is that Adobe ported - the Dolphin ubershader is another chunky bit of GPU code, but I've not heard anything about it since its initial debut, which was quite a while ago now, it might be interesting to see if th 8cx or SQ1 processors could handle it.
It has had quite a few extensions added since 1.1 and subgroups for various uses have popped up.
The v1.1 update came out roughly 2 years after v1, and we are less than 6 months from 2 years after v1.1 now - I'd expect a healthy update next year.
As for scientific applications, not really interested as far as GPU's go (assuming you mean the HPC supercomputer stuff) - ML and graphics work are my main interests in GPU compute, and they are getting plugged pretty well for the time being.
On an interesting note, there is actually a branch of dav1d that partially accelerates AV1 decode with Vulkan - not a great amount, but it could help platforms that will never get ASIC support for AV1 decode.