dc.contributor.author | Kilgard, Mark J. | en_US |
dc.contributor.editor | A. Kaufmann and W. Strasser and S. Molnar and B.-O. Schneider | en_US |
dc.date.accessioned | 2014-02-06T14:57:00Z | |
dc.date.available | 2014-02-06T14:57:00Z | |
dc.date.issued | 1997 | en_US |
dc.identifier.isbn | 0-89791-961-0 | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 1727-3471 | en_US |
dc.identifier.uri | http://dx.doi.org/10.2312/EGGH/EGGH97/045-055 | en_US |
dc.description.abstract | The OpenGL Graphics System provides a well-specified, widely accepted dataflow for 3D graphics and imaging. OpenGL is an architecture; an OpenGL-capable computer is a hardware manifestation or implementaion of that architecture. The Onyx2 InfiniteReality and 02 workstations exemplify two very different implementations of OpenGL. The two designs respond to different cost, performance, and capability goals. Common practice is to describe a graphics hardware implementation based on how the hardware itself operates. However, this paper discusses two OpenGL hardware implementations based on how they embody the OpenGL architecture. An important thread throughout is how OpenGL implementations can be designed not merely based on graphics price-performance considerations, but also with consideration of larger system issues such as memory architecture, compression, and video processing. Just as OpenGL is influenced by wider system concerns, OpenGL itself can provide a clarifying influence on system capabilities not conventionally thought of as graphics-related. | en_US |
dc.publisher | The Eurographics Association | en_US |
dc.subject | 1.3.1 [Computer Graphics] | en_US |
dc.subject | Hardware Architecture | en_US |
dc.subject | 1.3.6 [Computer Graphics] | en_US |
dc.subject | Methodology and Techniques | en_US |
dc.subject | Standards | en_US |
dc.title | Realizing OpenGL: Two Implementations of One Architecture | en_US |
dc.description.seriesinformation | SIGGRAPH/Eurographics Workshop on Graphics Hardware | en_US |