4 ms·
OpenCL is actually much worse. it requires way more querying of what the hardware does to use it rather than abstracting it away like other GPGPU libraries. Wh
by greggman 13y ago
OpenCL is actually much worse. it requires way more querying of what the hardware does to use it rather than abstracting it away like other GPGPU libraries.
While OpenGL can be full of extensions, if you ignore the extensions and stick to the base it's pretty easy to write a program that doesn't have to care what system it's on
- wtallis 13y agoOpenCL requires a lot of querying the hardware because that information can't be abstracted away without removing the ability to do effective performance tuning. If it were possible to make effective use of a GPU given a well-tuned BLAS, OpenCL wouldn't have been created in the first place. OpenGL extensions are likewise absolutely necessary to make full use of the hardware, but the extensions mess is way worse than the range of optional OpenCL features.
- greggman 13y agoYou don't need full use of the hardware most of time. Sure you get some flurishy extras but few apps/games if any need those extensions to be fun and beautiful. I know of no games that require extensions to run. Those that use them are rarely all that much better with them than without. So my point stands, you can generally use GL without worrying about hardware. Not so with CL.
- angersock 12y agoYou don't need full use of the hardware most of time If you're bothering to write something in OpenCL/other parallel computation framework, you probably care about that stuff.