illy [Shrimple-mode] :protomoji_orange_flag_lesbian: (@illyBytes)

@sodiboo@gaysex.cloud

1w

how different are graphics APIs actually? at the end of the day, isn't the core functionality to render triangles and run shaders? why is there OpenGL, Vulkan, Metal, and DirectX? what's the main meaningful differences?

WebGPU abstracts over all of these, to my understanding? that way, web programs work on all operating systems? so clearly they're similar enough to not have to care about the differences in my program?

why are there five . why so many. it's all just a frontend to the same functionality??? the same hardware??

(i'm not really a graphics programmer but i've interacted with these APIs in code and written graphical programs)

13

0

Arina Artemis

@arina@girlcock.club

1w

@sodiboo The way I understand it:
You've got Metal from Apple and DirectX from Microsoft (because both are special effn bois) and OpenGL as the more open one (which, I assume, you won't have to pay royalties for).
And then, at some point, some companies decided "hey, wouldn't it be cool if we could have a united API for everything" and came up with Vulkan.

1

0

1

0

sodiboo

@sodiboo@gaysex.cloud

1w

@arina ya but like? both Apple and Windows supported OpenGL for the longest time? so??

to my understanding, all of the options are somehow "better" than OpenGL? why exactly? i guess Metal and DirectX came out of that, as did Vulkan, just later. those three because open source improved last.

but then, what the fuck is WebGPU? if it's as powerful as those three but also somehow runs on OpenGL? why is it not limited in the same ways [which ways?] as OpenGL? [WebGPU being good is inferred from the existence of wgpu, which people use natively and it's modeled after WebGPU. clearly the API must be good and people don't use it because it's the only option on the web]

1

0

1

0