[nasso_dev]

wgpu (and webgpu more generally) is often presented as a very good choice for a cross platform low level graphics api. but it was designed around safety/security constraints to support the web, sometimes at the cost of performance (my understanding)

i heard somewhere this nice example: only big actors like AAA game engines would really benefit from the extra development effort it would take to use an even lower level api like vulkan/dx12 to squeeze the last 10% of performance that wgpu can't get you

so if i understand correctly, zed, just like a AAA game engine, wants to squeeze every last bit of performance from the gpu, and so wgpu is "too high level" for it? and blade is "like wgpu, but no design tradeoffs and lower level" so its a better fit? does that mean someday zed might reach for vulkan directly one day? im assuming dx12 is gonna be used on windows anyway?

i love kvark's work btw, we need more kvarks

[mikaylamaki]

Roughly yes, though I'd caveat it with the specific application of the GPU: simple, 2D, UI elements. We've already built an abstraction that allows us to fluently build up a design, and then burn it down into a collection of rectangles, paths, images, and such. We're not dealing with particle effects, lighting, 3D models, or anything else that game engines need to consider. As such, it's a lot lower cost for us to use something like Vulkan or DX12 directly. And, in fact, that was the backup plan if we didn't find something like Blade that we where happy with.