Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

On a reverse-engineered GPU like this, because of Vulkan's low-level design, implementing (early) OpenGL might actually be significantly easier.

Also, Vulkan isn't popular with game developers because availability sucks. Vulkan doesn't run on macOS. Or iOS. Or 40% of Android phones. Or Xbox. Or PlayStation. Or Nintendo Switch[1].

Unless you are targeting Windows (which has DirectX and OpenGL already), or those 60% of Android phones only, or Linux, why would you use Vulkan? On Windows, DirectX is a generally-superior alternative, and you get Xbox support basically free, and if you also support an older DirectX, much broader PC compatibility. On Android, just use OpenGL, and don't worry about separate implementations for the bifurcated Vulkan/OpenGL support. On Linux, just use Proton with an older DirectX. Whiz bang, no need for Vulkan whatsoever. Yes, some systems might perform better if you had a Vulkan over OpenGL, but is the cost worth it when you don't need it?

[1] Technically, Vulkan does exist for Nintendo Switch, but it is so slow almost no production game uses it, and it is widely considered not an option. Nintendo Switch is slow enough without Vulkan making it slower. Much easier just to use the proprietary NVIDIA library.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: