Disclaimer: This is believed up to date as of gfx version 0.18. 0.18 is intended to be the last version of the “old” or “pre-ll” gfx-rs API. It will be around forever and contributions/bugfixes accepted, but active development has shifted to a new crate using a different approach, called gfx-hal. gfx-hal is developed by the same people, has similar goals, and is still developed in the gfx repo, but is not at all like the pre-ll gfx. Instead it takes a different approach, intending to be an unsafe but fast and portable mostly-Vulkan implementation in Rust, similar to MoltenVK. If you want a tutorial on gfx-hal I recommend this one.

This is also all tested only with the OpenGL backend; by its nature gfx-rs should work the same on any backend, but I make no promises.

This is also not a tutorial on 3D programming. It assumes that the reader is familiar with OpenGL or a similar API.

Another good tutorial resides here, although it currently doesn’t work with Rust >= 1.20: https://suhr.github.io/gsgt/

Learning gfx-rs

So what is gfx-rs, and how does it work? The goal is to have a 3D graphics API that is portable across different 3D implementations, in a fairly low-level and efficient way. For instance, you could take the same code and run it on OpenGL, Vulkan and DirectX and it will do the same thing on all of them.

How does it do this? Basically by providing an abstraction that is a common superset of the behavior of all these API’s. All of these systems are, in the end, a way of managing resources, shoving data into the graphics card, defining shader programs that run on this data with the given resources, and then telling it to actually do stuff. gfx-rs tries to wrap all that up in a common API that’s applicable to any of these drawing backends.

Data model

gfx-rs’s model consists of only a few core types: Factory, Encoder and Device. These are the types you use to interact with the GPU. The Factory allocates resources, such as textures and vertex buffers. The Encoder takes commands that you give it, such as “draw this geometry” or “load this data into that shader variable”, and turns them into a list of instructions. Then the Device is what takes this list of instructions and actually sends them to the GPU, using OpenGL, DirectX or whatever API the backend uses.

There is a vast plethora of other types and somewhat confusing generics associated with gfx-rs, but these are the core pieces where the rubber actually meets the road. Whatever else you’re doing, you’re going to be getting resources from a Factory, telling an Encoder to generate commands, and then calling Encoder::flush(some_device) to feed those commands to the GPU.

This has some advantages beyond portability! This separation of concerns makes it easy to tell what functions allocate new stuff, what sends commands to the GPU, what changes shared state, and so on. Additionally, this model is fundamentally multithread-able: You can have multiple Encoders and queue up commands in each of them, then just have one place where those commands get sent to the GPU all at once. Depending on how the backend works this might result in performance improvements – Vulkan/Metal/DirectX12 probably does this much better than OpenGL or DirectX11, but the basic model still works with any backend. (Yes, there’s some overhead to this process as well, so gfx-rs is a bit slower than raw OpenGL, but from what little I know if you’re going to be trying to do multithreaded rendering you’re probably going to end up creating a similar structure no matter what. And for me the safety and portability is worth it.) I personally also like this for ease of debugging: It’s conceptually easier to dig into a list of commands and make sure that they’re what you want them to be, compared to having different parts of the programming emitting synchronous state-changing calls whenever they feel like it. It could even theoretically have an optimizer stage in it, to do things to the command buffer like removing redundant calls or reordering commands to make them more efficient, though I don’t think anyone’s been so bold as to actually do this yet. Still, the potential is there. :-D

There is one more component of this process: the pipeline. A “pipeline” is a collection of type definitions that define the inputs and outputs of a shader program. For instance, the inputs might be a set of vertices, uniform properties, and constants, and the output would be a render target… that is, a framebuffer that will get displayed on your screen. These type definitions and the shader programs that use them are wrapped together into a “pipeline state object” or PSO. So to actually draw something, you have to provide geometry to draw, data to give to the shader pipeline, and a PSO that represents the shaders that need to run.

Unfortunately, one of the problems that isn’t solved yet is that there is no unified shader solution. You have to write and use separate shaders for each backend individually. That’s not a huge problem, but it is something extra you have to do to make a program portable to different backends. The gfx_app crate already provides some framework for managing this, and hopefully as SPIR-V and other such technologies become more common it will get easier for gfx-rs to encompass this functionality.

Crate structure

This is where things get annoying, IMO. gfx-rs is made of a bunch of interrelated crates, and there are bunches of other crates that look like they’re a core part of it but actually aren’t and maybe aren’t even maintained by the core gfx-rs team. When in doubt, check the https://github.com/gfx-rs/ github group. All these crates are bundled together into one git project, so there’s no reason they can’t be all one thing, but they’re not. Additionally, none of the version numbers are in sync, so gfx 0.14 relies on gfx_core 0.6 and works with gfx_device_gl 0.13 and so on.

That said, once you figure the structure out it’s a fairly simple tree with gfx_core at the root, gfx_device_* depending on it, and gfx and gfx_window_* forming the leaves. So there is reason behind it all. Usually gfx and gfx_window_whatever are all you need to directly use. But for the sake of completeness, the following list contains all the actual gfx-rs crates:

  • gfx_core: Low-level types and operations; you usually won’t have to worry about it, but sometimes type definitions and such from it might creep through. If they do it might be a warning sign that you’re doing something wrong though. Irritatingly, some types defined in it are exposed in the crates that depend on them but https://docs.rs/ doesn’t link properly between crates, making it hard to hunt down the right types in the docs. Building a local copy of the docs might make life easier.
  • gfx: A nicer API built atop gfx_core; this is where the aforementioned Factory, Device and Encoder traits are defined, and generally what you need to be working with.
  • gfx_device_*: These provide the backends. Comes in gl, vulkan, metal, dx11, dx12, and possibly other varieties. At the moment, it appears that only the gl and dx11 ones are fully functional, but lots of work is happening on them.
  • gfx_window_*: These interface with various window providers. Generally the way things work is you will have your drawing API, whether OpenGL or Metal or whatever, which is only concerned with drawing. Alongside this you will have a “window provider” which handles interacting with the windowing system on whatever OS you’re using, sets window titles and icons, handles input events, and generally does everything besides drawing; these two API’s work together to let you actually do stuff. gfx-rs thus has interfaces to a number of popular window providers: best-supported is glutin, which is quite nice and written in pure Rust. However, there are other portable ones, namely glfw and sdl, along as platform-specific ones like metal and dxgi.
  • gfx_app: A layer of abstraction that lets you select backend and window provider more flexibly and portably. Use this if you want, it’s nice when it works, but it isn’t necessary and afaict is currently under heavy development.
  • gfx_gl: A customized OpenGL wrapper that gfx_device_gl uses. Probably not super useful to anyone else??

Along with these are many mostly-unrelated crates you will stumble across while trying to find gfx on <docs.rs> or <crates.io> just because they have gfx in their name, but which are often made by people completely unrelated to gfx-rs. Some of them are useful, some of them are booby-traps:

  • sdl2_gfx: Wrapper for the SDL2_gfx C library. Has nothing to do with gfx-rs.
  • gfx_window_sdl2: A booby-trap. Old, useless, no longer supported, and not made by the same people as gfx-rs in the first place. If you want to use the SDL2 window provider, the gfx_window_sdl crate is what you want. Don’t use gfx_window_sdl2.
  • gfx_text: A freetype-based text renderer for gfx-rs. Looks generally fine, probably less work than rolling your own renderer with rusttype.
  • gfx_glyph: An efficient font rendering library for programs using gfx-rs.
  • gfx_graphics: A drawing backend for the piston2d-graphics drawing API that uses gfx-rs to do its drawing. Not interesting to anyone not using piston2d-graphics.
  • gfx_phase and gfx_scene: Higher-level drawing abstractions of some kind or another. I know nothing about them, but it is said that they are obsolete.
  • Probably lots of others. Sigh.

Actually doing things

So the actual processing flow for using gfx-rs seems quite conceptually similar to Vulkan/DX12/whatever. You create a bunch of resources (vertex buffers, textures, uniforms, etc), bundle them together with a set of shaders, then stuff them into the encoder via various commands like draw(). However the encoder batches them up for you so nothing actually happens (except resource allocation) until you call encoder.flush(), at which point it does all the things at once. This is also how it targets different backends: the encoder translates its commands into OpenGL calls, Vulkan calls, whatever.


Create a project, add the folowing dependencies to your Cargo.toml:

gfx = "0.17"
glutin = "0.12"
gfx_window_glutin = "0.20"

If you are not using gfx_window_glutin you may have to add gfx_device_gl = "0.15" as well.

Creating a window

gfx-rs’s examples are quite nice here; the triangle one uses the raw gfx_window_glutin window provider, while the others use gfx_app.

Basic process is to use whatever window provider you actually want (glutin, glfw, whatever) to do the setup, then pass the WindowBuilder or equivalent into the gfx_window_*::init() method. It will do whatever it needs to, and pass you back a created window and all the gfx state objects in a big tuple.

Glutin example:

extern crate gfx;

extern crate gfx_window_glutin;
extern crate glutin;

use gfx::traits::FactoryExt;
use gfx::Device;
use gfx_window_glutin as gfx_glutin;
use glutin::{GlContext, GlRequest};
use glutin::Api::OpenGl;

pub type ColorFormat = gfx::format::Srgba8;
pub type DepthFormat = gfx::format::DepthStencil;

const BLACK: [f32; 4] = [0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0];

pub fn main() {
    let mut events_loop = glutin::EventsLoop::new();
    let windowbuilder = glutin::WindowBuilder::new()
        .with_title("Triangle Example".to_string())
        .with_dimensions(512, 512);
    let contextbuilder = glutin::ContextBuilder::new()
    let (window, mut device, mut factory, color_view, mut depth_view) =
        gfx_glutin::init::<ColorFormat, DepthFormat>(windowbuilder, contextbuilder, &events_loop);

    let mut running = true;
    while running {
        events_loop.poll_events(|event| {
            if let glutin::Event::WindowEvent { event, .. } = event {
                match event {
                    glutin::WindowEvent::Closed |
                    glutin::WindowEvent::KeyboardInput {
                        input: glutin::KeyboardInput {
                            virtual_keycode: Some(glutin::VirtualKeyCode::Escape), ..
                        }, ..
                    } => running = false,
                    _ => {}


Exact same thing using SDL:

extern crate gfx;
extern crate gfx_window_sdl;
extern crate sdl2;

use gfx::Device;

pub type ColorFormat = gfx::format::Srgba8;
pub type DepthFormat = gfx::format::DepthStencil;

const BLACK: [f32; 4] = [0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0];

pub fn main() {
    let sdl_context = sdl2::init().unwrap();
    let video = sdl_context.video().unwrap();
    let mut builder = video.window("Example", 800, 600);

    let (mut window, mut gl_context, mut device, mut factory, color_view, depth_view) =
        gfx_window_sdl::init::<ColorFormat, DepthFormat>(&video, builder).unwrap();

    'main: loop {
        let mut event_pump = sdl_context.event_pump().unwrap();

        for event in event_pump.poll_iter() {
            match event {
                sdl2::event::Event::Quit { .. } => {
                    break 'main;
                _ => {}

From creating the window, you get a:

  • window: your window provider’s window type.
  • gl_context (for SDL, Glutin and others have it basically as part of the window)
  • device (for most graphics backends; apparently Vulkan doesn’t need this)
  • factory
  • render target view
  • depth stencil view

The render/depth views are the things your shaders output to; I don’t know enough about how depth stencil stuff works to comment much, but the render target is essentially your “output screen”.

Your options are glutin, glfw, sdl, and maybe one or two others I’m not familiar with. Glutin is the best supported; unless you have a compelling reason, you should probably use that. Most of the work and thus most of the knowledge and support are done on the glutin window provider Doesn’t mean the glfw and sdl window providers are unsupported or bad, just that they’re second-tier. I’ve gotten glfw and sdl to work and they seem to do fine. Basic examples can be found at https://github.com/icefoxen/gfx/tree/master/examples/triangle-glfw and https://github.com/icefoxen/gfx/tree/master/examples/triangle-sdl. (Dec 2018: shoot, links are broken it appears that at some point I nuked those examples by accident…)

Defining a pipeline

Ok, now you have to define a pipeline to actually shove your drawing information through. The easiest and best way to do this is with the `gfx_defines!’ macro, like so:

// Put this code above your main function
    vertex Vertex {
        pos: [f32; 4] = "a_Pos",
        color: [f32; 3] = "a_Color",

    constant Transform {
        transform: [[f32; 4];4] = "u_Transform",

    pipeline pipe {
        vbuf: gfx::VertexBuffer<Vertex> = (),
        transform: gfx::ConstantBuffer<Transform> = "Transform",
        out: gfx::RenderTarget<ColorFormat> = "Target0",

gfx_defines! is documented fairly well, but I’ll explain the bits we use here. The above definition defines three structs: Vertex, Transform, and pipe::Data. Vertex is your vertex type and is just a struct with two fields, pos and color. This is the vertex type your vertex buffers will get filled with, and that your vertex shaders will receive: they will get two inputs, a vec4 named a_Pos, and a vec3 named a_Color. The Transform struct has one field, transform, and will appear to your shaders as a uniform struct containing a single mat4 named u_Transform. You can define multiple types of vertices, constant buffers and pipelines, just by giving them different names.

So hopefully you see where this is going; I’m sorry I only know the way it appears in GLSL.

Now let’s look at the pipeline, pipe. This says that to draw stuff you need a VertexBuffer<Vertex>, where Vertex is the vertex type you just defined. Similarly, it takes a ConstantBuffer<Transform> named “Transform”, and outputs to a RenderTarget<ColorFormat> named “Target0”. The ColorFormat is the color format type you defined earlier, and the RenderTarget is… hey, your WindowProvider::init() function returned a RenderTargetView that I said was the screen’s framebuffer, right? So your pipeline is saying that you need a buffer containing your Vertex and Transform types, and outputs to a RenderTarget. You can give it your window’s render target to draw to the screen, or create a different RenderTarget to render into memory for multi-pass rendering. It all makes sense, right?

Ok, now let’s define shaders to use these values, and wrap everything together into a PSO. Our vertex shader looks like this:

#version 150 core

in vec4 a_Pos;
in vec3 a_Color;

uniform Transform {
    mat4 u_Transform;

out vec4 v_Color;

void main() {
    v_Color = vec4(a_Color, 1.0);
    gl_Position = a_Pos * u_Transform;

And our fragment shader is just:

#version 150 core

in vec4 v_Color;
out vec4 Target0;

void main() {
    Target0 = v_Color;

To load these shaders we suck them in and create a PSO, like so:

let pso = factory.create_pipeline_simple(

The key part is the innocent little pipe::new() here; that is where the pipeline definition you created with gfx_defines! gets instantiated. If you have another pipeline type named my_pipeline that does something entirely different with vertex and uniform types, you would just create your pipeline with my_pipeline::new() instead of pipe::new().

Also, as far as I know this is the only part of gfx-rs that really doesn’t (and can’t) help you out in terms of making it Just Work with different backends. You have to know what backend you’re using, and load the right shaders itself. gfx_app has some supporting framework for making this easier, but there’s not much that gfx-rs can do to make sure the right backends load the right shaders. It also can’t portably ensure you don’t have a typo in the uniform names of one of your shaders. It will at least check that sort of thing for you at runtime and give you a sensible error if you do though.

For more in-depth explanation of how pipeline definitions work, see the excellent blog post at http://gfx-rs.github.io/2016/01/22/pso.html

Drawing stuff

Okay, so take a look at the documentation for the Encoder::draw() method. It takes a Slice, a PipelineState, and a PipelineData. The PipelineState we already created with Factory::create_pipeline_simple() while the PipelineData is just the data type for your pipeline definition from the gfx_defines! macro. You can create a VBO and a Slice with Factory::create_vertex_buffer_with_slice().

So you end up with something like this:

// Put at the start of your file, outside of the loop
let mut encoder: gfx::Encoder<_, _> = factory.create_command_buffer().into();
const TRIANGLE: [Vertex; 3] = [
    Vertex { pos: [ -0.5, -0.5, 0.0, 1.0 ], color: [1.0, 0.0, 0.0] },
    Vertex { pos: [  0.5, -0.5, 0.0, 1.0 ], color: [0.0, 1.0, 0.0] },
    Vertex { pos: [  0.0,  0.5, 0.0, 1.0 ], color: [0.0, 0.0, 1.0] },
//Identity Matrix
const TRANSFORM: Transform = Transform {
        transform: [[1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0],
                    [0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0],
                    [0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0],
                    [0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0]]

let (vertex_buffer, slice) = factory.create_vertex_buffer_with_slice(&TRIANGLE, ());
let transform_buffer = factory.create_constant_buffer(1);
let data = pipe::Data {
    vbuf: vertex_buffer,
    transform: transform_buffer,
    out: color_view.clone(),
// Put in main loop before swap buffers and device clean-up method
encoder.clear(&color_view, BLACK); //clear the framebuffer with a color(color needs to be an array of 4 f32s, RGBa)
encoder.update_buffer(&data.transform, &[TRANSFORM], 0); //update buffers
encoder.draw(&slice, &pso, &data); // draw commands with buffer data and attached pso
encoder.flush(&mut device); // execute draw commands

Notice that TRIANGLE uses the Vertex type defined in your gfx_defines! macro; the macro really isn’t doing anything too magical in most cases, all the data types it defines are just plain ol’ structs. We create a vertex buffer with the Factory, handing it a slice of our Vertex type and, optionally, a list of vertex indices. We aren’t bothering with vertex indices right now, so we just give it () instead. (You could also just use Factory::create_vertex_buffer().) Creating a uniform buffer for our Transform is just as easy, then we load the data from our Transform into it. Finally we create our pipe::Data object which contains all the stuff our pipeline needs, and feed it all into encoder.draw().

Note that most of the useful Factory methods are for some reason in the FactoryExt trait, so you must do use gfx::traits::FactoryExt; before you can use them. Basically just to annoy you.

You can also put multiple things into a buffer at once, but I’m not quite sure how that works yet. Digging into the gfx-rs examples would probably be enlightening.

Defining colors

Most times that you actually want color it goes into a shader variable, so you can handle those variables however you want. It just becomes another part of your vertex definition, as before.

The main exception (so far) is the Encoder::clear() method, which has this signature:

clear<T: RenderFormat>(&mut self,
                       view: &RenderTargetView<R, T>,
                       value: T::View) where T::View: Into<ClearColor>

This is a great example of trait-salad making things look complicated, when really it isn’t that complicated. So this method takes a RenderTargetView which is the object that’s getting drawn to, and then it takes a T which has a complicated type signature that really comes down to “something that can be turned into a ClearColor that is valid for the given RenderTargetView”. This is just abstracted out because your RenderTargetView could theoretically be some weird device that only takes certain color formats. So what is a ClearColor? For that you have to descend into the gfx_core crate, sift through ColorInfo, ColorMask, PackedColor, ColorSlot, and so on until you discover that ClearColor is just a type that represents a color, with a bunch of From methods so that you can create one from a u32, a [f32;4], and so on.

Making an API amazingly generic makes life complicated. But it also makes it possible to ensure, at compile time, that the color you provide can be turned into your render target’s color format in an intelligent way. Is it worth it? Hell yeah.

Creating a texture

Great, now how do we load and use a texture? With the Factory, naturally. Factory::create_texture_immutable() is usually what you probably want; it takes a Kind, which describes the data layout, and an array of data, the exact type of which is based on your ColorFormat but which is probably &[u8]. This will return the Texture, which is the actual data descriptor, and a ShaderResourceView which seems to be, as the name implies, a texture handle that can be fed into a shader. How are these different? Dunno. There’s also Factory::create_texture_immutable_u8() which appears to just slurp out of a flat array of u8, so that might be simpler to use. (It actually takes an &[&[u8]] where each sub-array is a single mipmap level for the texture!)

THEN you need a sampler as well, which defines how a texture is sampled into a shader. Factory::create_sampler() creates it, and it takes some straightforward parameters that specify things like interpolation mode, wrapping mode, etc. FactoryExt::create_sampler_linear() may be nice to use as well.

So you have your pipeline data object which defines all the stuff that gets shoved into a shader, as well as the stuff it produces at the end of it… your texture samplers are just one more thing that goes into this. First though, let’s load an image. The easy way to do the loading is to use the image crate, though anything that produces a &[u8] will work.

extern crate image;

fn gfx_load_texture<F, R>(factory: &mut F) -> gfx::handle::ShaderResourceView<R, [f32; 4]>
    where F: gfx::Factory<R>,
          R: gfx::Resources
    use gfx::format::Rgba8;
    let img = image::open("resources/player.png").unwrap().to_rgba();
    let (width, height) = img.dimensions();
    let kind = gfx::texture::Kind::D2(width as u16, height as u16, gfx::texture::AaMode::Single);
    let (_, view) = factory.create_texture_immutable_u8::<Rgba8>(kind, gfx::texture::Mipmap::Provided, &[&img]).unwrap();

Then you make your pipeline contain a sampler and UV stuff in your vertex definitions:

    vertex Vertex {
        pos: [f32; 2] = "a_Pos",
        uv: [f32; 2] = "a_Uv",

    constant Transform {
        transform: [[f32; 4];4] = "u_Transform",

    pipeline pipe {
        vbuf: gfx::VertexBuffer<Vertex> = (),
        tex: gfx::TextureSampler<[f32; 4]> = "t_Texture",
        transform: gfx::ConstantBuffer<Transform> = "Transform",
        out: gfx::RenderTarget<ColorFormat> = "Target0",

For some reason, your tex item says it is just a TextureSampler but really takes a gfx::handle::ShaderResourceView AND a TextureSampler in a tuple. So to put it together:

let sampler = factory.create_sampler_linear();
let texture = gfx_load_texture(&mut factory);
let data = pipe::Data {
    vbuf: quad_vertex_buffer,
    tex: (texture, sampler),
    out: color_view,

Then you just set up your shaders properly.

Vertex shader:

#version 150 core

in vec2 a_Pos;
in vec2 a_Uv;

out vec2 v_Uv;

void main() {
    v_Uv = a_Uv;
    gl_Position = vec4(a_Pos, 0.0, 1.0);

Fragment shader:

#version 150 core

uniform sampler2D t_Texture;
in vec2 v_Uv;
out vec4 Target0;

void main() {
    Target0 = texture(t_Texture, v_Uv);

Setting blend mode

This is where stuff gets magical. It’s just a type in your pipeline definition. So you switch:


    pipeline pipe {
        out: gfx::RenderTarget<ColorFormat> = "Target0",



    pipeline pipe {
        out: gfx::BlendTarget<ColorFormat> = ("Target0", gfx::state::ColorMask::all(), gfx::preset::blend::ALPHA),

And that’s it!

This has an advantage and a (small) disadvantage. The advantage is it’s totally rad. The disadvantage is that the blend-mode is part of your pipeline definition, so if you want to change it you have to alter your pipeline object or create a new one. The pipeline portion of the gfx_defines! macro specifies a structure called pipe::Init and the right-hand-side of the assignment on each line is the default values of it that get created by pipe::new(). However, there’s no reason you can’t create your own pipe::Init structure from scratch and assign it to whatever you want.

As a game programmer who tends to make relatively simple games, I basically set the blend mode once at the beginning of the program and forget about it anyway.


gfx-rs is a pretty nice low-level portable graphics API. It’s conceptually similar to next-gen graphics API’s such as Vulkan, DX12 and Metal, while being easier to use, Safe, cross-platform, and capable of using any of these API’s as a backend. That’s pretty slick. Once you get a handle on what the different parts are and how they fit together, it’s honestly pretty darn nice to use, and it compartmentalizes all the pieces it needs very elegantly. The people working on it are also generally pretty awesome, know what they’re doing, and are amazingly helpful if you pop into their Gitter chat and ask questions.

It has some downsides: Its documentation, while improving, is not the best, especially at the level of big overview stuff. Hopefully this helps that, a little. Its structure of a million little crates doesn’t really help, IMO, and makes it harder for the uninitiated to figure out what they should be doing. It’s young; I’ve discovered a couple bugs in the process of using it, but they’re generally fixed quickly. This also means that the API is in flux and might change in big ways in the future… but even if it does, version 0.17 is pretty solid for all the things I need it to be able to do, so for me at least there’s no reason not to keep using it even if new versions change everything in crazy ways.

I’m pretty sure this doesn’t really scratch the surface of what gfx-rs can do, and I’m no expert in graphics programming in general. But hopefully this is useful to people. If anyone has corrections or suggestions, contact me on Reddit /u/icefoxen or in the #rust-gamedev channel on irc.mozilla.org.


This is a random salad of stuff that I don’t have anywhere else to put yet:

  • Resources are Arc-referenced, so cloning them is cheap. This is very nice because otherwise trying to have multiple things refer to a texture, for example, is a PITA. Everything in gfx::handle::* can be cloned easily as well.
  • Encoder is really a convenience wrapped around the CommandBuffer type which is lower-level; kvark cites this as an example of the difference between gfx and gfx_core, but I don’t really understand what the distinction is yet.
  • per kvark again: “there is PSO definition and PSO object. An object depends on the PSO definition + shader program + rasterizer state + PSO init data. So what you’d typically want is very few PSO definitions, and hence very few PSO Data types.” But you can create as many PSO data objects as you want, really, though each one might consume graphics card memory for the resources it needs. But again, since resources are Arc’ed, they’re easy to share.

Performance notes

There is a fairly basic performance example that gfx-rs includes which just draws 10,000 triangles, and has modes to do it using raw OpenGL or gfx-rs. Checking it out, the results were… well, surprising and disappointing: OpenGL was way faster than gfx-rs. Well that didn’t seem right, and some profiling got me an answer: gfx-rs was emitting lots and lots of redundant calls to set OpenGL state. Some talk with the devs on Gitter and some digging around and hacking of the Encoder and lower-level CommandBuffer got the example down to pretty close to the OpenGL example, just by working a bit harder to issue fewer redundant OpenGL calls. Not bad work for one evening of slightly-intoxicated hacking. See https://github.com/gfx-rs/gfx/issues/1198 for details.

Conclusion: People have been much more focused on getting the API right and making it work well than on performance, which is pretty much the right decision. There’s no real reason for gfx-rs to be slow besides the effort not having been put in yet, and so there’s lots of low-hanging fruit to pluck when it becomes worth it. Building the command buffer with the Encoder does have some overhead in the OpenGL backend, so I’d expect with some of work the OpenGL backend would end up with performance about half that of raw OpenGL, at the worst case. But from what little I know of optimizing OpenGL code, the answer is always “less redundancy” and “fewer draw calls doing more work” anyway, and that still applies for writing graphics code with gfx-rs. Plus the command-buffer model lets you spread most of the CPU cost of building it across multiple threads.

It will be very interesting to see how much overhead exists in the Vulkan-and-stuff backends, since they should be more amenable to this command-buffer-based model, but alas as of Feb 2017 they’re not really done enough yet. Honestly gfx-rs is designed more with these next-gen API’s in mind than OpenGL anyway, and they all present CommandBuffer-like things that gfx-rs will be using directly, so ideally there should be next to no overhead for those backends. I’m excited!

Random type notes

  • device: the OpenGL (or whatever) context. It’s what the Encoder interacts with to actually execute drawing commands.
  • factory: An object that creates resources such as textures (or encoders or pipelines, for that matter, so it’s basically the root object perhaps)
  • encoder: A list of drawing commands
  • command buffer: A lower-level list of drawing commands; the Encoder seems to generally be the higher-level device-independent interface, while a CommandBuffer is the lower-level device-dependent one. More or less.
  • vertex: A structure containing all the data needed for, well, a single vertex.
  • pipeline data: The collection containing the data needed for drawing a frame, such as vertex buffers, shader variables, textures, render targets, etc. Basically the set of variables contained in the shader pipeline. The pipeline state object seems to contain the shaders themselves.
  • pipeline state object: The actual collection of information on a pipeline, consisting of shader programs and information on how to bind the pipeline data object to them. So the PSO is the actual pipeline, the pipeline data is just what’s input to it.
  • resources: defines a bunch of associated types: shader, texture, buffer, etch. So by implementing this trait you can lock a bunch of types together into one type, it looks like. Interesting… What the concrete types is for a Resources trait appears to be defined by the backend.

Things that aren’t addressed yet in this tutorial

  • Srgb

Random wisdom that hasn’t been incorporated yet.

10:54 < kvark> Icefoz: gfx-rs exists on 2 planes: the core and the render. Factory is from the core. Render
               adds some new concepts, like the typed pipeline state objects, so it extends the factory to
               work with them via FactoryExt.
10:55 < kvark> Icefoz: a better example of this core/render division is the CommandBuffer - Encoder concepts.
               The former is core, the latter is render, more high-level, but conceptually the same thing.
@ebkalderon Thank you for writing this up. Minor nitpick: gfx_device_vulkan::Device does not exist. 
@icefoxen 13:57 @ebkalderon Not a minor nitpick! How does Vulkan work then?
@msiglreith 14:00 Only exposing a graphics command queue atm in vulkan
@ebkalderon 14:03 @icefoxen Basically, it has a concept of starting and finishing frames. Once a frame is started, one or more graphics queues are generated from a device (mapped to a physical GPU on the system) and are passed around the application. These queues act kind of like gfx:: Devices and can consume command buffers in a thread-safe manner. Finally, the frame is finished and displayed on-screen.
@icefoxen 14:04 Aha, interesting. I was assuming that those would basically be how the the gfx::CommandBuffer was implemented for that backend.
@ebkalderon 14:06 I thought so too, but the differences are so great that it's difficult to ignore. Maybe check out the gfx_device_vulkan API on Docs.rs and see for yourself?
@msiglreith 14:07 Small nitpick, command queues are only created once at initialization.