Guru3D.com Forums

Guru3D.com Forums (http://forums.guru3d.com/index.php)
-   Games, Gaming & Game-demos (http://forums.guru3d.com/forumdisplay.php?f=13)
-   -   OpenGL vs DirectX (http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?t=167627)

athlon64guy 01-17-2006 11:50

OpenGL vs DirectX
 
which grahpics engine do you think looks better? both engines look beautiful but they also look very different from eachother which makes it hard to compare. i dont know why but i think openGL looks better than DirectX.

btw, im not an nvidia fanboy.

dudecat64 01-17-2006 12:07

Depends on the game i guess. I like open gl cause nvidia is the best for open gl and they seem to play smoother for me. I do play css which is direct x and it also plays very well at 1028x768 2aa 4af. Halflife2 for me plays ok but still has annoying hiccups in it. I like both. I have no real answer to which is better. They both are great.

Darkoz 01-17-2006 12:46

Both can look great but OpenGL to me has a more solid 3 dimensional look to it which I prefer.

King Lui 01-17-2006 14:35

what is the big difference between the two?
screenshots?

morbias 01-17-2006 23:02

I've always been an openGL fan, ever since 3dfx and GLide. In general openGL games have always looked better imo, more contrast - darker blacks and brighter whites, but this might just be my imagination. The textures seem to be more detailed too, you can see it in UT and the IL2 games.

grimsanta 01-17-2006 23:28

I agree, OGL is amazing. It is easier on GPUs too because it lacks shaders, which OGL has other methods to impliment shader like effects.

oxide 01-18-2006 01:47

I prefer Glide.

:P

I miss those days :(

Logick 01-18-2006 01:56

DirectX Forever :rock:
I dont know i just like it better

Shex 01-18-2006 02:02

I personally prefer OpenGL because it seems smoother than DirectX even at low fps.

TheGriffin 01-18-2006 03:48

OpenGL here too, it feels like you can have more control over the world of the game if you use DirectX though.

[X]Pyro 01-18-2006 04:14

well just think once Vista hits the market it will be the end of Open Gl,because it will only support Direct x and Open Gl is neutered totally.

This is in the profile of Vista.

Clements 01-18-2006 04:25

But if you are using OpenGL in Fullscreen, there is no performance problem. Only in Windowed Mode where OpenGL is layered over the D3D Aeroglass interface do you get a hit.

[X]Pyro 01-18-2006 04:35

Microsoft's first technical beta of Vista layers OpenGL over Direct3D in order to use OpenGL with a composited desktop to obtain the Aeroglass experience. If an an application runs using a high-performance OpenGL ICD - the desktop compositor will switch off - significantly degrading the user experience.

pimp_gimp 01-18-2006 04:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by [X]Pyro
well just think once Vista hits the market it will be the end of Open Gl,because it will only support Direct x and Open Gl is neutered totally.

This is in the profile of Vista.

Are you they're gonna do this, I read that they only did that did that as an experiment in the beta's. And If they do drop it how are we gonna play future games like Quake Wars.

Clements 01-18-2006 04:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by [X]Pyro
Microsoft's first technical beta of Vista layers OpenGL over Direct3D in order to use OpenGL with a composited desktop to obtain the Aeroglass experience. If an an application runs using a high-performance OpenGL ICD - the desktop compositor will switch off - significantly degrading the user experience.

Yeah, that exactly what it says at OpenGL.org. What it means is that OpenGL is layered over the top of D3D for the Aeroglass interface to work, which incurs a speed hit.

In fullscreen, the interface is disabled and you get full performance. This is explained in the large thread which the title links too.

Kon$olE 01-18-2006 04:47

I say OGL looks better... and i have since the days of CS 1.0 when switching to it made me go "Wow."

I do think that DX preforms better though... it could just be my cards afvantage in that area thats making things seem that way however. The most interesting comparison to do in this case would be the same game on both of these.

Dojomann 01-18-2006 04:49

OpenGL = Open Source = Always changing

That's why I believe it always has the potential to look the best.

All the nVIDIA demos are done in OpenGL.

Alexstarfire 01-18-2006 05:08

OpenGL for life. All the reasons for OpenGL are what I would have said. I still remember being able to use the crappiest cards to play UT. Just throw in an nVidia card and it would run perfectly.

I also couldn't agree more with the smoothness and lower FPS. I'm not sure how they do it, but just looking at CoD 2 shows that it's true.

meatfestival92 01-18-2006 05:31

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct3D_vs._OpenGL

And by the way, Call of Duty 2 is D3D.

Tyketto 01-18-2006 05:32

OpenGL for many reasons and got nothing to do with nvidia being the best
for gaming GL.
i like the graphics of OGL and how it's more forgiving on your pc,
also it doesn't suffer much glitches like Direct3D does, better stability.
directX is more like a lottery and it's a lot more dependent on the
engine and optimizations the developers did, and it's not too forgiving either.

comparing "Chronicles of riddick" vs "FarCry", i have to say farcry wins
the graphics war , while riddick wins the perfomance war even though
the engine is still jaw dropping, don't you agree? :thumbup:

http://ve3dmedia.ign.com/ve3d/image/...1103226471.jpg

meatfestival92 01-18-2006 05:34

duplicate post...

Dr. Vodka 01-18-2006 05:38

I dunno why... IMHO I prefer OpenGL over D3D 'cause games feel smoother when in low-fps situations, and have better quality... It's beautiful what open source can do, huh? D3D is easier to program than OGL... but in the end... that's a trade. The easy-to-program D3D abilities translate to lower quality in-game... On the other hand... OpenGL is exactly the opposite, it's more difficult to program... but in the end, the results are better...

Also... did you know that Glide was based on opengl? M$ had to come with D3D and ruin the party :( . Can you imagine an up-to-date Glide? It'd rock!

Tyketto 01-18-2006 05:46

i don't want glide/opengl/d3d, i want 3DFX back! :evilgrin:
but i agree with mr vodka opengl is great and glide was real good,
i remember playing many games back in the years with my 3dfx voodoo card
in glide mode, namely Turok and some other..ahhhh the days.
that's another reason why i'm fond of OpenGL in general.

pimp_gimp 01-18-2006 05:58

Quote:

(taken from http://www.organicvectory.nl/)

A bit more about that OpenGL - Vista thing

After reading through the GameDev.net and OpenGL.org forums on this subject I got the feeling a lot of guessing is done. I do not claim any special knowledge, I'm just an ordinary developer. Rather then joining the wild speculations I tried to extract some information from the current Vista Beta release.
Test system:
AMD Athlon 64 3200+ 2.20 GHz

1 GB RAM

Asus K8V SE Deluxe main board

ATI Radeon 9800 Pro

Microsoft Vista x64 Beta1

Starting an OpenGL app fullscreen has no effect. I tried my own full screen applications and all failed due to lack of OpenGL support. I feel the misconception is that the issue is application launch-time related. It is not. It is driver install-time. So full screen or windowed does not matter. If you have no IHV OpenGL ICD installed, you get the OpenGL-D3D Translator, whether you have Aero active or not. If you install an IHV OpenGL ICD, you have normal hardware acceleration. However, you then can not have Aero. Not during an (active) OpenGL context (windowed or full screen) and not when no OpenGL contexts are active at all. Just simply because the ICD is installed. So it is actually more the other way round what most people think. OpenGL will disable Aero, Not Aero will disable OpenGL. Since I always disable any "fancy" GUI stuff anyway, it is not a problem for me to do without Aero. Average users however will probably want to use Aero en then they have to choose between OpenGL acceleration and Aero.
All this is what I learned from my own testing on the MS Vista Beta1. Who knows what will be changed when it actually launches. When you come to think of it, this is not very different from things today. The OpenGL implementation MS provides is fixed at 1.1 (software implementation) It is only when you install an IHV driver that you get anything else. Actually, you get more from Vista. You get OpenGL 1.4 (albeit simulated on top of D3D, still better then Software) Only difference is that the install of a real OpenGL driver affects the GUI in a negative way.
The Vendor, Renderer, version and extension strings the OpenGL-D3D translator returns:
Vendor: Microsoft Renderer: OpenGL-D3D Translator Version: 1.4 Extensions: GL_EXT_abgr GL_EXT_bgra GL_EXT_compiled_vertex_array GL_EXT_packed_pixels GL_EXT_vertex_array GL_WIN_swap_hint GL_ARB_multitexture GL_EXT_texture_env_combine GL_ARB_texture_env_combine GL_EXT_texture3D GL_EXT_draw_range_elements GL_EXT_rescale_normal GL_SGIS_texture_edge_clamp GL_EXT_texture_edge_clamp GL_SGIS_texture_border_clamp GL_ARB_texture_border_clamp GL_EXT_texture_env_add GL_ARB_texture_env_add GL_EXT_texture_env_dot3 GL_ARB_texture_env_dot3 GL_ARB_texture_mirrored_repeat GL_EXT_blend_logic_op GL_EXT_blend_minmax GL_EXT_blend_subtract GL_NV_blend_square GL_SGIS_generate_mipmap GL_ARB_window_pos GL_EXT_blend_func_separate GL_EXT_multi_draw_arrays GL_EXT_texture_cube_map GL_ARB_texture_cube_map GL_EXT_blend_color GL_EXT_texture_lod_bias GL_EXT_stencil_wrap GL_Autodesk_valid_back_buffer_hint GL_ARB_texture_compression GL_EXT_texture_compression_s3tc GL_S3_s3tc GL_ARB_transpose_matrix GL_EXT_polygon_offset GL_EXT_subtexture GL_EXT_copy_texture GL_EXT_texture_object GL_EXT_texture WGL_EXT_extensions_string GL_ARB_texture_env_crossbar GL_ARB_multisample GL_ARB_point_parameters GL_EXT_point_parameters GL_KTX_buffer_region GL_EXT_separate_specular_color GL_EXT_secondary_color GL_EXT_fog_coord GL_ARB_texture_env_crossbar GL_ARB_depth_texture GL_ARB_shadow GL_SGIS_texture_lod 2005-08-08
No support for OpenGL on Microsoft Vista (Longhorn)?
After reading some shocking news on OpenGL.org about Microsoft not supporting OpenGL in MS Vista, I installed the Vista Beta and did some tests myself. Out of the box Vista only had an OpenGL to D3D "driver". But after installing IHV drivers I got normal Hardware accelerated OpenGL. However, the new desktop look "Aero" lacks it's "fancy" tricks (dissolve, deform etc..).
Let's hope this issue can be solved before Vista ships (in a year). As things look know, this is yet an other attempt from MS to get rid of OpenGL. I hope a strong resistance will rise like it did 8 years ago. Back then it was Quake (John Carmack), Mesa en many others that foiled the attempts of MS to choke OpenGL. Big difference is that in those days DirectX (D3D) was horrible. Nowadays it is an capable API (whether you like it or not).
So my conclusion from this article and other articles, threads at OpenGL.org is that OpenGL is nuetured only at the software level (as its always been, as the software OpenGL driver shipped with windows hasn't been updated in years, its still 1.1, as with Vista it will be 1.4. As from my reading OpenGL will only run at a higher version at the hardware level with Aero interface disabled. So yes openGL support is still there in Vista, just moreso at the hardware level and not the software level. Without a proper graphics driver installed you get the DirectX-OpenGL wrapper.

Kon$olE 01-19-2006 01:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by meatfestival92
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct3D_vs._OpenGL

And by the way, Call of Duty 2 is D3D.

Wikipedia has everything! Nice find, a good read.


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:03.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright (c) 1995-2014, All Rights Reserved. The Guru of 3D, the Hardware Guru, and 3D Guru are trademarks owned by Hilbert Hagedoorn.