Khronos Group delays Vulkan 1.0 release

The Khronos Group will not release its Vulkan graphics API this year. While the specification is complete, according to a recent press release, the group says it's still receiving implementation feedback and that a legal review needs to be completed. Khronos does claim that the release is “imminent,” although they have not indicated a new release date.

Created by the team behind OpenGL, Vulkan attracted attention at this past March’s Game Developers Conference. Vulkan promises to give developers a new “close to the metal” programming standard that's meant to minimize driver overhead. It uses AMD’s Mantle API as its foundation, but use of Vulkan will not be limited to AMD hardware.

Microsoft didn't respond meekly to the news of a new graphics API. The company announced DirectX 12 in March of this year, as well, and it made similar promises about reducing driver overhead and abstraction.  Although DirectX 12 was released along with Windows 10 in July, it isn’t yet commonly used in games.

Comments closed
    • HisDivineOrder
    • 4 years ago

    Everything about Mantle has been excessive hype, delays, disappointment, and long forgotten promises.

    Thus, it should surprise no one that its newest incarnation is delayed. It’s inherent in the product’s DNA and, quite frankly, in the way the Khronos group does business, too. Put together, a delay was inevitable and probably the first of many.

    This is as much a result of the way OpenGL panned out as it is a reflection of what AMD handed them as a freebie.

      • VincentHanna
      • 4 years ago

      This statement would have been more impressive if it had been made 8 months ago.

    • Zizy
    • 4 years ago

    Heh, even WP will dominate mobile space before Khronos manages to release something on time 😀

    • tipoo
    • 4 years ago

    I’m upset that Apple just left the Vulkan consortium. Metal is fine for iOS to OSX ports, but Vulkan would allow a single low overhead API to cover all three major PC environments.

    It sucks that with their currently five year old OpenGL version on Mac, I lose 30-50% of any app performance for native mac ports, let alone wrappers. And that’s against notoriously under optimized Boot Camp.

    I had hoped Vulkan would allow more native titles to not have to dip into Boot Camp, but nope, looks like Apple has no interest or hopes Metal will be widely industry adopted.

      • Brianmj
      • 4 years ago

      Where did you hear that Apple disbanded from the Vulkan working group?

        • BobbinThreadbare
        • 4 years ago

        I don’t know if Vulkan is a separate group but the Apple gets top billing in the Khronos Board of Promoters [url<]https://www.khronos.org/members/[/url<]

        • tipoo
        • 4 years ago

        Just a comparison of the original Siggraph talk when it was OGLnext, and the GDC talk revealing Vulkan, both feature Apple as part of the supported platforms in the slides and talk; fast forward to the recent showings post-metal on OSX, all references have been removed and the talks do not mention apple at all. Same with the LunarG info.

        It was a quiet exit of course as you’d expect from Apple. But all reference to them is just gone.

          • the
          • 4 years ago

          Could it be that Apple has been planning Vulcan release for OS X 10.12 next year? With the PC version lagging behind, it may wind up as part of OS X 10.13 in 2017. Or maybe 2027 considering their track record of adopting new versions of OpenGL.

            • tipoo
            • 4 years ago

            I don’t see why they would leave the working group if they planned on it being in OSX only a year out. Or even if they were going to take say 4 years and be super late – why leave the group and so have no say in the end product? And leaving close to the Metal release on OSX. I would absolutely love to be wrong here but that’s where the tea leaves are pointing me right now.

            • Deanjo
            • 4 years ago

            It wouldn’t be hard for the graphics vendors to provide an OS X driver (such as nvidia already does for Cuda).

            • tipoo
            • 4 years ago

            Apple actually writes a large part of the graphics driver under OSX (which is also partially the reason for them being 5 years behind on OpenGL, incidentally. Also how they were able to implement Metal across GPUs. ). The CUDA thing I assume was specially agreed upon, introducing a whole different graphics API may be a different story and since Apple wants to ensure a certain level of experience I don’t imagine them giving away that control and having an API in there they’re not responsible for.

            CUDA, I’m sure, is also double checked and certified by them.

            If it was easy for graphics vendors to change things driver side on OSX, I’m damn sure it wouldn’t be running OpenGL 4.1!

            Besides, relying on it graphics vendor level would mean it’s not system-wide on all shipping Macs, which would also mean less incentive for developers to target multiple APIs.

          • Brianmj
          • 4 years ago

          Apple requested that their logos be removed. They dont want to be seen affirming support for a product they haven’t announced plans on.

          [url<]http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=sig-gles32-glu&num=4[/url<] This is around the time their logo disappeared from all Vulkan PDFs. If Apple disbanded, the news would have reverberated through the Vulkan community. We'd know.

            • tipoo
            • 4 years ago

            Interesting. I’d like to be wrong! We’ll have to wait a few years to see if it’s ever implemented I would guess.
            Where does it say in your link that Apple requested their logo be removed?

            • Brianmj
            • 4 years ago

            It doesn’t say. In the section Vulkan Window System Integration / Platforms, the last line of the first paragraph, it reads, “at this time, Apple hasn’t pursued Vulkan support for OS X.” This was said at a time when their logo was disappearing from PDFs and presentations. They were still very much a part of the Vulkan working group when they said this.

      • xeridea
      • 4 years ago

      It’s just like Apple to want to do their own thing, rather than support existing technologies, even though they are supposedly open source supporters. OSX was always a terrible platform for gaming anyway, so I don’t know why people whine that there is very limited support. I don’t see how shunning Vulkan is helping them any, no one makes games for Mac, and they would have less reason if they needed to do a special port for a tiny slice of the market.

        • tipoo
        • 4 years ago

        See, there was actually a small uptick in games for Mac when they moved from OpenGL 3.something to 4.1. So this is a bit of a chicken and egg thing. Saying “there are few games for mac so the API doesn’t matter” seems a bit backwards to me. With a good API that wasn’t losing half a games performance on a given set of hardware, maybe devs would be arsed to make a native title.

        And especially with Vulkan, where Windows and Linux could use it anyways, making the game under one API would take far less work.

          • BobbinThreadbare
          • 4 years ago

          There are a *lot* of steam games on OSX these days. The majority of games that have come out in the last year have been Windows+OSX.

          By Valve’s count, there are 2700 games for OSX.

    • odizzido
    • 4 years ago

    Let’s hope games never use DX12. I want to be able to game well on something other than windows.

      • Firestarter
      • 4 years ago

      for that they need to beat DX12 at their own game on Windows. If Vulkan proves to be inferior (even if it’s just drivers) or even just barely equal it’ll go the way of opengl and only be used in small minority of games

        • odizzido
        • 4 years ago

        Yes this is true. However it’s also true that valve wants to push steamOS and that they have a lot of control over publishers/devs by way of cash incentives. This could make a big difference.

        • LostCat
        • 4 years ago

        Vulkan’s already got promised support from Mantle devs, so it’s already got more traction than OpenGL 4.x which has…umm…RPG Maker MV.

          • BobbinThreadbare
          • 4 years ago

          There’s actually a number of recent games that require OpenGL 4.2 or higher. You can see in this Phoronix review a number of games not running because of drivers that only support OpenGL 3.x

          [url<]http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=amd-19-dec&num=2[/url<]

            • LostCat
            • 4 years ago

            I wouldn’t know(/care) anything about Linux, but fair enough.

    • DrCR
    • 4 years ago

    An interesting quick read on Vulkan vs OpenGL and driver support:
    [url<]http://blog.mecheye.net/2015/12/why-im-excited-for-vulkan/[/url<]

    • baobrain
    • 4 years ago

    Hopefully Vulkan is as good as we hope it is. As long as it’s substantially better than the mess opengl is, then it should see widespread adoption, at least on Linux.

      • chuckula
      • 4 years ago

      Adoption on Android is a big deal and hopefully that helps regular Linux as well simply because there’s a guaranteed large install base.

    • chuckula
    • 4 years ago

    Not news: Khronos delays something.

    News: Krogothed is impressed by something.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This