Just wanted to say though I'd like to make it a min. requirement for
blender to support pixel shaders
last I checked I wasn't kickin it with the Rockafellas :)
I also want to echo what campbell said that blender runs very well on sub
$500 systems which btw support pixel shaders.
I also want to
Hi Chad,
I don't think this response justifies the careful and positive way everyone who
works on Blender is handling this topic. But I realize it might not be well
visible whether people who talk here are also contributing to Blender though.
Knowing all of the active devs here quite well, I
On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 12:31 PM, Ton Roosendaal t...@blender.org wrote:
Hi Chad,
I don't think this response justifies the careful and positive way everyone
who works on Blender is handling this topic. But I realize it might not be
well visible whether people who talk here are also
On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 3:31 AM, Ton Roosendaal t...@blender.org wrote:
I don't think this response justifies the careful and positive way everyone
who works on Blender is handling this topic. But I realize it might not be
well visible whether people who talk here are also contributing to
Hi,
maybe blender should have two specs, like a lot of games have.
There you have _minimal_ requirement and a _recommended_ system.
_minimal_ : the game (blender) will start, but only with lowest settings.
_recommended_: you can play with high settings (not highest) ... for
blender: you can
Hi,
Nobody of the active team suggested to stick to Nvidia. Blender should remain
cross platform, as wide as possible.
I have the impression the crits here interpret my proposal far too negative. I
tried to define it a positive step forward (for our future), and to come with a
clear
By reading some great proposals I conclude that Blender should have a minim
requirement:
1. Quad Core
2. OpenGL 4.3 (pref mid to high nvdia quadro)
3. 8-16 GB memory
4
And beside that maybe Blender should go in direction of Gnome 3, Unity and
Win8, and start hiding options from users. Who
FWIW, I see 3D content creation as a fundamentally high-end endeavor.
Being able to start learning Blender on low-end systems is great. However,
I want Blender to be taken seriously as a professional tool, not just
something you play with until you are able to afford real hardware and
I just wanted to say that I too agree that we should assume some higher
level opengl.
I think it would be rather helpful in fact if we didn't rely on traditional
fixed function rendering period
but instead keep it simple such that we're always using custom shading. It
keeps it simpler,
easier to
By the way, Mesa drives, which are hardware accelerated open source
drivers for Linux only go up to OpenGL 3.0 at the moment.
So OpenGL 3.0 should be minimum, not OpenGL 3.2.
You can support an all shader pipeline with OpenGL 2.x anyway. Mesa
hardware accelerated drivers should always serve as
By the way, Mesa drives, which are hardware accelerated open source
drivers for Linux only go up to OpenGL 3.0 at the moment.
So OpenGL 3.0 should be minimum, not OpenGL 3.2.
You can support an all shader pipeline with OpenGL 2.x anyway. Mesa
hardware accelerated drivers should always serve as
As Wilkins and I said, we are not using OpenGL 3.0+ pipeline right now.
We are not even close to it as it would require complete
re-implementation. Although we got basic thing working in ES, there is a
lot thing to be done before it will become usable. When it does
(hopefully next year), we
3.0+ means, requires, writing -everything- in shaders (except if you
use compatibility profile which sort of beats the purpose). It is a
totally different mindset than the one we currently use. It is state
of the art of course but it also means new design to accomodate for
that (shader machine to
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 8:25 AM, Jed Frechette jedfreche...@gmail.com wrote:
FWIW, I see 3D content creation as a fundamentally high-end endeavor.
Being able to start learning Blender on low-end systems is great. However,
I want Blender to be taken seriously as a professional tool, not just
If development is being held back by attempting to support old hardware
and OS versions and no one is willing to step up and support those bits
then their use should be depreciated.I would much rather see the limited
developer hours available put towards moving Blender forward rather than
On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 11:36 AM, Chad Fraleigh ch...@triularity.org wrote:
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 8:25 AM, Jed Frechette jedfreche...@gmail.com wrote:
FWIW, I see 3D content creation as a fundamentally high-end endeavor.
Being able to start learning Blender on low-end systems is great.
Hi Alexander,
With minimal specs I mean this:
- The reference we test Blender for and ensure it keeps working.
(startup settings, OpenGL defaults)
With average specs I mean:
- The reference we release and configure and design Blender for.
(UI layouts, tool designs)
Of course you then can
: Re: [Bf-committers] Minimal Blender specs - 5 year old systems OS
Hi Alexander,
With minimal specs I mean this:
- The reference we test Blender for and ensure it keeps working.
(startup settings, OpenGL defaults)
With average specs I mean:
- The reference we release and configure
Ton,
realize that we are used by schools both in the US and worldwide, and
we are used in many poor countries. XP is still fairly widely used
and provides supperior performance for Blender compared to Vista.
Also, Windows 7 has only recently (September) passed XP in
marketshare, and XP is still
Hey Tom,
who said something about actively prevent usage on older hardware?
This decision is mainly about support and valuable development time of
active devs. We have to draw a line somewhere and we will.
And please, we are talking about *upcoming* versions of Blender,
versions and technology
@blender.org
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 5:35 AM
Subject: [Bf-committers] Minimal Blender specs - 5 year old systems OS
Hi all,
I propose to update the minimal spec for hardware on the Blender site. This was
getting very ancient now.
Old:
1 GHZ Single Core CPU
512 MB RAM
1024 x 768 px
Saw someone mentioned requiring Nvidia video cards and thought I'd put in
my two cents. PLEASE DON'T DO THAT! There are dozens of recent laptops out
there that only have Intel GMA GPUs. I have an Asus laptop with a Core i3
processor (quad-core, I think), and it currently runs Blender just fine.
-
Hi all,
I propose to update the minimal spec for hardware on the Blender site. This was
getting very ancient now.
Old:
1 GHZ Single Core CPU
512 MB RAM
1024 x 768 px Display with 16 bit color
3 Button Mouse
OpenGL Graphics Card with 64 MB RAM
New:
32 bits, Dual Core CPU with at
If we do that then maybe we should, on the developer level, assume
support for shaders and modern (2.1 at least!) OpenGL functionality is
a prerequisite too? We could benefit a lot from this kind of
assumptions.
___
Bf-committers mailing list
I forgot to link a source. :P
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_8_Series
Cheers,
-Andy
On 29/01/2013 13:42, Antony Riakiotakis wrote:
If we do that then maybe we should, on the developer level, assume
support for shaders and modern (2.1 at least!) OpenGL functionality is
a prerequisite
IDK, I think a lot of users get hand-me-downs and there seems to be a trend
of lower power (energy efficient) computer being made these days. Not to
mention if blender ever gets fully ported to tablet-like devices.
It might be better to target OS versions rather than hardware specs since
I understand where you are coming from but we will have to update
Blenders minimum specs eventually as it will become harder and harder
for devs to maintain as hardware becomes unavailable to purchase after a
few years. Also we must remember that OpenGL has seen 9 updates since
2006 with many
Hi Dan,
Tablets are all multicore and have OpenGL ES 2 or 3, which is quite modern
compared to what we use now.
-Ton-
Ton Roosendaal Blender Foundation t...@blender.orgwww.blender.org
Blender Institute
I can only fully agree with this.
It becomes a pain to support old systems, especially Windows XP and old
GPUs.
Not only do we support hardware / software longer than other 3D
software, as Blender is free people can also always stick to an older
version.
Am 29.01.2013 15:45, schrieb
IMHO
OpenGL 4.0 + GLSL 4.00.9
___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
Not only do we support hardware / software longer than other 3D
software, as Blender is free people can also always stick to an older
version.
--
Thomas Dinges
I think this is a great point. Perhaps instead of supporting old
hardware, Blender.ord should support older versions of Blender.
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 7:11 AM, Thomas Dinges blen...@dingto.org wrote:
I can only fully agree with this.
It becomes a pain to support old systems, especially Windows XP and old
GPUs.
Not only do we support hardware / software longer than other 3D
software, as Blender is free people can
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 9:53 AM, Chad Fraleigh ch...@triularity.org wrote:
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 7:11 AM, Thomas Dinges blen...@dingto.org wrote:
I can only fully agree with this.
It becomes a pain to support old systems, especially Windows XP and old
GPUs.
Not only do we support hardware
For my own work on Blender, I am assuming that we want to migrate away
from all of the functions deprecated in OpenGL 3, but only require
functionality available in OpenGL ES 2.
Everything else is treated as an extension.
However, what currently uses the fixed-function pipeline will be
As I read this debate, I keep wondering how much is theoretical and
how much is existential. I run a relatively old computer; Nvidia 8600
gt, AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 3800+ and about 4 GB ram
and a new ssd drive (love it!). The SVN version of Blender runs just
fine as long as I
35 matches
Mail list logo
