Qt5 default ANGLE on Windows



  • Does anybody know that Qt5 binaries on "Downloads" has compiled with ANGLE or not? I feel some performance issues with graphic process. Same project works better with Qt4 while Qt5 promised to have a better performance.


  • Moderators

    I think Angle is used by default since about a month.



  • what about effects on webkit? it's more notable there.
    or IDK v8 sucks?!


  • Moderators

    v8 is the fastest JS engine on the market, so I don't suppose it causes you problems. I don't know nor care for webkit at the moment, so I can't really say more :)

    You can recompile Qt5 without angle support, I think a relevant configure flag is already integrated into the source code; there was a discussion on that a few weeks ago on dev ML.



  • [quote author="sierdzio" date="1353918358"]
    You can recompile Qt5 without angle support, I think a relevant configure flag is already integrated into the source code; there was a discussion on that a few weeks ago on dev ML.[/quote]

    does it affects? normally ANGLE should give a better performance on windows. BTW i should give it a try with -no-angle option.



  • ANGLE will give you performance only on systems without native/good opengl support. It is some kind of middleware what takes opengl calls from program engine and converts them to DirectX 9 and calls this. So it just can't do better performance when native opengl calls. Except the system sucks and doesn't have/or have very poor opengl support(like Virtual Machines).



  • [quote author="AcerExtensa" date="1353921166"]ANGLE will give you performance only on systems without native/good opengl support. It is some kind of middleware what takes opengl calls from program engine and converts them to DirectX 9 and calls this. So it just can't do better performance when native opengl calls. Except the system sucks and doesn't have/or have very poor opengl support(like Virtual Machines).
    [/quote]
    If I understand what you wrote, If I have in my video hardware at least OpenGL 2.1 support, then I can build my Qt 5.0.0 libraries with the "-opengl desktop -no-angle" option? It sure goes a long way to removing many dependencies which are not needed in distributions.



  • Yes, whats right. But if you will to redistribute your software on other systems, users may get troubles or graphic glitches for example on some Intel Atom Netbooks or older PC's... So if you sure what your software will be used only on platforms with OpenGL support and installed graphic drivers, -opengl desktop is better option and it will give you more performance then ANGLE "wrapper", but if you will be on the safe side and your software should be running on all supported x86 platforms you will be safe only with ANGLE.



  • [quote author="AcerExtensa" date="1359983507"]Yes, whats right. But if you will to redistribute your software on other systems, users may get troubles or graphic glitches for example on some Intel Atom Netbooks or older PC's... So if you sure what your software will be used only on platforms with OpenGL support and installed graphic drivers, -opengl desktop is better option and it will give you more performance then ANGLE "wrapper", but if you will be on the safe side and your software should be running on all supported x86 platforms you will be safe only with ANGLE.[/quote]

    OK, I am sorry but I am having a little trouble understanding what you wrote (or the way you wrote it). Maybe someone else reading this thread can decode the comment a bit. I believe what you are trying to convey is that -opengl desktop is preferred but only where updated drivers are installed. Alternately ANGLE is a safe "fallback" option



  • Ummm, the primary reason for the inclusion of angle was the lack of OpenGL support in windows 8 in metro mode. You still get OpenGL in desktop mode.

    bq.
    your software should be running on all supported x86 platforms you will be safe only with ANGLE

    That would include macOS and Linux as well. So I am not that sure the statement is correct.

    I agree it is a very bad design to have to build the entire framework anew just to use desktop or no OpenGL, but for the time being, this is the only way, plus it will help you get rid of a few external dependencies. Performance wise I doubt angle can offer an improvement compared to desktop OpenGL, feature wise it is a no brainer... I haven't done any in-depth analysis but I think angle is significantly lacking in both aspects.

    So logically, since angle is only necessary in a very limited range of cases, it is not that good of an idea to make it the default renderer, and this is set to change in the near future. It would be good to be able to switch graphic stacks dynamically instead having it a compile time decision, but that is not likely to change in the foreseeable future.



  • To summarize then:

    configure -opengl desktop -no-angle -no-icu

    I added the last so to get rid of the webkit.



  • Yup, I recently did a similar static build of 5.0.1 and am quite happy with it - 8 mb executable for a qtcore+qtgui+qtwidget project without external dependencies.



  • Fantabulous! Almost what I am looking for. Version 5.0.1 is in the middle of a build now. I need shared libs though due to LGPL rules. The smaller dependency footprint is the same goal though.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to Qt Forum was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.