undefined | Better HN

0 pointsncallaway1y ago0 comments

Yea, wgpu is basically an adapting layer between the WebGPU API and opengl, vulkan, directx. So it's the same† API.

But WebGPU in the browser is also an adapting layer between those technologies, it's just the browser that does the adapting instead of the wgpu library. For Firefox, WebGPU is adapted to those underlying systems by wgpu: https://github.com/gpuweb/gpuweb/wiki/Implementation-Status

† There are some "native-only" extensions beyond the WebGPU spec that gpu provides, so it does go a little beyond WebGPU. But for the most part, it's very similar.

0 comments

solardev1y ago

Wait... so if webgpu (the API) is to allow browsers to use the underlying graphics libs... but desktop apps can access those directly... why would they want to go through the browser abstraction API instead? Better dev ex and ergonomics?

ncallawayOP1y ago

> why would they want to go through the browser abstraction API instead? Better dev ex and ergonomics?

That and portability. The ergonomics are always up for debate, but I find it a much more modern and nicer interface than OpenGL which feels...quite dated. How it compares to something like Vulkan or Metal is up for debate.

But for portability if I write my code using directx, then I can only run it on systems with directx. If I write it for vulkan, I can only target systems with vulkan. If I write for metal, I can only target systems with metal.

However, if I use wgpu and the WebGPU API, I can target any system that has directx or vulkan or metal or OpenGL. I can also target wasm and compile my application for the web.

So, I can really easily write code that will run natively on linux, on osx, on windows and the web and will use the graphics library native to that platform.

solardev1y ago

I see now. Thanks for explaining! That makes a lot of sense.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointsncallaway1y ago0 comments

Yea, wgpu is basically an adapting layer between the WebGPU API and opengl, vulkan, directx. So it's the same† API.

† There are some "native-only" extensions beyond the WebGPU spec that gpu provides, so it does go a little beyond WebGPU. But for the most part, it's very similar.

0 comments

solardev1y ago

ncallawayOP1y ago

> why would they want to go through the browser abstraction API instead? Better dev ex and ergonomics?

However, if I use wgpu and the WebGPU API, I can target any system that has directx or vulkan or metal or OpenGL. I can also target wasm and compile my application for the web.

So, I can really easily write code that will run natively on linux, on osx, on windows and the web and will use the graphics library native to that platform.

solardev1y ago

I see now. Thanks for explaining! That makes a lot of sense.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse