![]() ATI Radeon HD/Mobility Radeon 2000, 3000, 4000 series graphics cards/on-board chips.The following graphics cards and chips specifically support OpenGL 3.0/3.1/3.2/3.3 and should be considered the absolute minimum (note: actually support may be subject to driver availability, OpenGL 3.3 and system hardware support) Understandably what may be easily affordable and acquirable hardware for one person may not be for another. In this second part of the discussion on running Blender on older computers we take a look at upgrading incompatible computers and hardware cheaply and where it can generally be acquired. Perhaps there are other VMs that have better OpenGL support (VirtualBox?).In first part of “ Will Blender run on older computers” the minimum requirements necessary to run Blender were discussed, namely the need for graphics hardware supporting and/or compatibility with OpenGL 3.3 or higher (largely as related to Windows OS computers), itself published c.2010.ĭesign note: It should be noted that Blender does cater to ‘legacy hardware’ to a degree in providing support for components and systems that are almost a decade old (based on OpenGL version supported), a very long time in technological terms. So this should not be a big issue on native Windows machines. ![]() Every standard 50$ graphics card sold the last years should work with evo. We do not think that a eight or four years (evo 4) old graphics card is a to high hardware requirement for evo. We do not have the ressources to support two render systems in evo in the future. The difference between evo 3.1 and evo 3.2 is the missing Direct3D support. evo 3.2 needs OpenGL 2.1 (with some extensions), this OpenGL version was released in 2006, almost eight years ago. However this affects mainly a rather small group of users (Mac users running evo within a virtual machine with limited graphics driver (OpenGL) support). You are right, the requirements did change in the latest versions and will change with evo 4 again (OpenGL 3.3). Of course we can understand the problems these changes produce and it was no easy decision. This way the latest software is usable to the widest range of users and they all get the benefits of the various bug fixes and updates to the degree that they can use them. For example, a user with less than optimal graphics capabilities might still be able to build a model and do calculations with some level of basic rendering instead of the best rendering or someone with older graphics might only be able to build the model and do only calculation and no rendering. So rather than preventing users from even installing Evo, it could adjust what it's capable of doing based on the users graphics capabilities, to a certain degree at least. It would be nice if Evo had graphic options that allowed users to use it with different graphic capabilities. ![]() The planed obsolescence is happening too fast. At some point this becomes counter productive for us users and defeats the point of having free software when you are constantly having to upgrade hardware and software, not to mention the time required to deal with these issues. I feel like every new version requires higher end graphics support and always removes support for the previous requirements. Given the latest advancements in Evo and the many problems I see regarding graphics compatibility, I think the Dial team should consider allowing Evo to support different levels of graphic capability like many other high end graphics intensive and rendering applications.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |