On 06/07/2016 10:41, John C. Turnbull wrote:
Thanks - great to hear!
I am a firm believer in the significance that Vulkan will play in the
future of GPU based applications.
That's also my view. However, we are not yet at the stage where the
graphics API is the bottleneck for most work loads, especially with Qt
Quick. Even in Qt 3D we are still bottle-necked by the CPU work that
needs to be done prior to the CPU load of submitting the actual OpenGL
calls.
For Qt Quick there is a lot of lower hanging fruit to be tackled than
providing a Vulkan backend. Laszlo is doing great work in abstracting
the Qt Quick renderer to make it work with other backends which will
enable a Vulkan renderer in the future - along with DX12 and Metal.
Qt 3D already has an architecture that would make it relatively easy to
add backends for other graphics API but again, we have plenty of other
stuff to tackle before OpenGL becomes the bottleneck. Especially since
Qt 3D can already take advantage of instanced rendering, compressed
textures, texture arrays, UBOs and compute shaders. Until we can be
convinced that Vulkan would remove a large bottle neck we will likely
continue adding more features, examples, documentation, fixing bugs and
optimising performance. But rest assured, Vulkan is on the radar.
Cheers,
Sean
On 6 Jul 2016, at 18:33, Dmitry Volosnykh <dmitry.volosn...@gmail.com
<mailto:dmitry.volosn...@gmail.com>> wrote:
John, here you are: https://blog.qt.io/?s=vulkan&lang=en
On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 11:31 AM John C. Turnbull
<ozem...@ozemail.com.au <mailto:ozem...@ozemail.com.au>> wrote:
Just out of interest, has anyone within the Qt community or
company considered Vulkan?
It looks to me as though the future of low level graphics APIs is
not OpenGL or Direct3D or Metal.
It's Vulkan.
> On 6 Jul 2016, at 17:53, Kai Koehne <kai.koe...@qt.io
<mailto:kai.koe...@qt.io>> wrote:
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Interest [mailto:interest-bounces+kai.koehne
<mailto:interest-bounces%2Bkai.koehne>=qt...@qt-project.org
<mailto:qt...@qt-project.org>]
>> [...]
>> Multimedia and web rendering are a different story. Others
are better
>> qualified to comment on the details of how WebEngine,
QtMultimedia, and
>> the older alternatives are implemented - but they are all
wrappers around
>> other libraries. Just because widgets don’t render their own
pixels on the
>> GPU doesn’t mean those libraries can’t render the framed
content on the
>> GPU, AFAIK. At least theoretically, but I’m not up-to-date on
whether the
>> widget implementations are currently doing that efficiently.
>
> QWeb_Engine_View indeed uses Qt Quick (and therefore potentially
> the GPU) underneath , even for the widgets integration. So it
might be worth
> a try porting your app from Qt WebKit to Qt WebEngine (if only
because
> Qt WebKit is deprecated).
>
> For the video, it looks like QVideoWidget might benefit from
OpenGL if
> it's parent is a QOpenGL widget. Maybe you can experiment with
this.
> (I don't have first hand experience with QVideoWidget though).
>
>
>
> Regards
>
> Kai
> _______________________________________________
> Interest mailing list
> Interest@qt-project.org <mailto:Interest@qt-project.org>
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
_______________________________________________
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org <mailto:Interest@qt-project.org>
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
_______________________________________________
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
_______________________________________________
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
