[Dave Baumann]

I'm hearing some talk coming out of SIGGRAPH that NVIDIA may be getting ready to step away from Cg and fully support HLSL and The OpenGL Shading Language - anyone hear anything similar?

[gokickrocks]

they seemed to still be pushing Cg by providing workshops...i wouldnt be surprised if they decide to can it however

[Joe DeFuria]

Originally Posted by DaveBaumann

I'm hearing some talk coming out of SIGGRAPH that NVIDIA may be getting ready to step away from Cg and fully support HLSL and The OpenGL Shading Language - anyone hear anything similar?

I'm thinking that nVidia doesn't really have a choice, as developers will be / are doing this all on their own.

[digitalwanderer]

Originally Posted by Joe DeFuria

I'm thinking that nVidia doesn't really have a choice, as developers will be / are doing this all on their own.

Woo-hoo! Looks like sanity will prevail after all, big thanks to all the developers out there!

[Malo]

half-life 2 would have been a big one in this regard. with so much attention on it and the support for nvidia and ati being judged, the fact that they used HLSL must be a real kick in the balls for nv.

[digitalwanderer]

Originally Posted by Kalbaz

half-life 2 would have been a big one in this regard. with so much attention on it and the support for nvidia and ati being judged, the fact that they used HLSL must be a real kick in the balls for nv.

Yeah, but does nVidia really have anyone to blame for that other than themselves?

I think it's good to see their hubris rewarded with failure, lord knows they need a bit-o-humbling lately!

[[maven]]

There has been similar talk on the DirectX mailing-list (but that might be Wavey's source as well)...

[Dave Baumann]

No, it wasn't actually - got any links?

[nelg]

Originally Posted by DaveBaumann

No, it wasn't actually - got any links?

http://discuss.microsoft.com/SCRIPTS...1&F=&S=&P=5807

>Of course you're right.
>Ok, no more Cg questions.

And also please note that NVIDIA's line seems to now be that Cg is 'almost
legacy' (my words, not theirs). They were asked at SIGGRAPH which language
to prefer and in open conference stated that HLSL is the preferred language
to use on DirectX and OpenGL's High Level shading language is to be
preferred when using OpenGL.

Assuming that this is the company line, I guess this whole issue will
therefore go away soon and we can return to a more pure technical
discussion.

I agree that tools with Cg integrated will remain as an issue since it will
clearly take some little time before they are all upgraded to use HLSL etc,
but realistically I believe that the language war is pretty much over.

[I'm sure someone from NVIDIA will be quick to correct me if I have wrongly
represented their position.]

Thanks,


Richard "7 of 5" Huddy
European Developer Relations Manager, ATI

[RussSchultz]

/puts tinfoil hat on

Well, an ATI spokesperson WOULD say something like that.

/takes tinfoil hat off

[Malo]

lol I bet ATI will be happy with this result, didn't they co-develop HLSL with M$?

It had to happen eventually and since HLSL is not really specific to any vendor, more developers would use it to remain neutral and to guarantee support.

what do they mean by 'legacy language' though? Is Cg that much less comprehesive and capable than HLSL?

[digitalwanderer]

Originally Posted by Kalbaz

what do they mean by 'legacy language' though? Is Cg that much less comprehesive and capable than HLSL?

I think that "legacy language" just refers to the fact that it never caught on and that no one is using it.

Damn, this IS good news!

[Malo]

Originally Posted by digitalwanderer

I think that "legacy language" just refers to the fact that it never caught on and that no one is using it.

Damn, this IS good news!

digital wanderers bias meter:

Anything else [X----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--]nvidia

[digitalwanderer]

Originally Posted by Kalbaz

digital wanderers bias meter:

Anything else [X----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--]nvidia

Biased? Moi?

Nah, I just call 'em like I see 'em.

[Doomtrooper]

Originally Posted by RussSchultz

/puts tinfoil hat on

Well, an ATI spokesperson WOULD say something like that.

/takes tinfoil hat off

I told ya so....

[Dave Baumann]

Well, I've been hearing there was some pressure from MS as well, however if they concede to MS you can bet they will have arranged some kind of recompense.

[Mark]

Originally Posted by DaveBaumann

Well, I've been hearing there was some pressure from MS as well, however if they concede to MS you can bet they will have arranged some kind of recompense.

Without question. But what could Microsoft offer nVidia to make them drop Cg?

[Malo]

inclusion of nv optimised paths?

[digitalwanderer]

Originally Posted by Ratchet

Without question. But what could Microsoft offer nVidia to make them drop Cg?

WHQL waivers....

[WaltC]

I would rather think nVidia might be relieved to shed the burden and the expense. (Kind of like 3dfx shedding GLIDE, in a way, except in the degree of market penetration.) At the time nVidia started work on Cg, D3d/OpenGL HLSLs were not even apparent on the horizon. Now that they are becoming a reality there isn't much need for nVidia to continue to invest in supporting Cg, IMO.

I for one would welcome nVidia shifting back to working with M$ along with other IHVs to formulate the APIs and the HLSLs as well. Consumers and developers both will benefit, and the irony is, so will nVidia.

[RussSchultz]

I wonder if MS finally agreed to pluggable backends to their HLSL compiler?

That, and I wonder who's going to be spearheading common HLSL between DX and OGL?

[Ostsol]

Originally Posted by RussSchultz

I wonder if MS finally agreed to pluggable backends to their HLSL compiler?

That, and I wonder who's going to be spearheading common HLSL between DX and OGL?

I'd bet on a compiler that can compile DX9 HLSL to OpenGL shader assembler and OpenGL HLSL to DX9 shader assembler. Perhaps that'll eventually get into RenderMonkey (which hasn't been updated in a while).

[RussSchultz]

OpenGL doesn't use assembly as their high level language, or as their low level language, so you'd have to develop a "translator" between DX-HLSL to OpenGL HLSL.

[Ostsol]

Originally Posted by RussSchultz

OpenGL doesn't use assembly as their high level language, or as their low level language, so you'd have to develop a "translator" between DX-HLSL to OpenGL HLSL.

True, but it could still potentially be compiled down to an assembler language.

On reflection, however, I think I might be missing your original point about an API independant HLSL entirely. . . I'm guessing that you were implying an API independant HLSL that does not compile down to any assembler code, but the binary machine code that the GPU utilizes directly (like what OpenGL HLSL does and D3D HLSL can do).

Is this correct? If so, then I'm guessing that it won't happen any time soon -- especially if OpenGL and DirectX shader capabilities start to differ significantly. An example example would be if one API starts putting depth and stencil operations in the programmable pipeline or unifies vertex and fragment shading significantly before the other API does.

[RussSchultz]

I can't imagine them diverging architecture too wildly, since the same hardware has to run both. Or at least it does in 99% of the hardware out there. (Excepting a few crazy super high end professional cards, everthing needs to be DX capable)