PDA

View Full Version : OpenGL 2.1 vs DX9 and DX10


flukester
06-13-07, 03:48 PM
I don't see OpenGL dying.. do you? I also don't see it inferior in any way to DX10.

http://the360gen.forumup.org/viewtopic.php?t=1466&mforum=the360gen

I think Carmacks new engine is gonna be awesome and I can't wait.

Rakeesh
06-13-07, 04:06 PM
AFAIK the primary benefits of DX10 come from new lighting and shading effects, so face shot comparisons don't really give you a good idea of what the difference is.

E.g. this:

http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/2007/features/hardware/vista/rollover1.jpg

vs this:

http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/2007/features/hardware/vista/rollover1_over.jpg

And this:

http://img338.imageshack.us/img338/4250/93758924hd1.png

vs this:

http://img309.imageshack.us/img309/421/xbu0.png

Gabrobot
06-13-07, 04:08 PM
Just so people know, that picture (the one in the link showing all the API comparisons) is bull****...many of those images are prerendered (the one in middle was made by an artist who now works at Blizzard), and the rest of it's pretty irrelevant.

SlamDunk
06-13-07, 04:17 PM
All the "OpenGL 2.1" ones, except the NVIDIA Human Head at bottom left, are offline renders i.e. not real-time.

http://img309.imageshack.us/img309/421/xbu0.png
That's a target render :)

SeriTonin
06-13-07, 04:21 PM
Fact of the matter is, regardless to how powerful each API is, their power alone isn't the deciding factor to whether it dies or not. It's all about developer support and the reality is iD is the only developer still too stubborn to jump on the dx bandwagon. Even 3d realms (for prey) took the kernel of the doom 3 engine and ripped it clean of opengl and into direct3d.

opengl is dead.

3DBrad
06-13-07, 04:44 PM
A large portion of those "OpenGL 2.1" pictures are software rendered images from CGtalk.com and Mudbox :thumbdwn:

Look!

Edit:

I had to go and set them straight, I'm 36dplayer on there, just joined. :D

jolle
06-13-07, 05:31 PM
Some of those Images are from Mudbox Gallery..
doubt they are realtime rendered

3DBrad
06-13-07, 05:40 PM
They aren't, and in case there's any doubt in your mind, this is over at CGtalk,

http://i170.photobucket.com/albums/u267/BF2_review/fake2.jpg

I can't stand it when people twist stuff. :thumbdwn:

The Doom-3-esque guy with the gun, weird glasses, etc. is also an image done by a guy over at CGtalk as well.

|MaguS|
06-13-07, 05:44 PM
AFAIK the primary benefits of DX10 come from new lighting and shading effects, so face shot comparisons don't really give you a good idea of what the difference is.



Everything that can be accomplished in DX10 can be done in DX9 and OpenGL 2.1. The thing that DX10 brings is just less restrictions but really all those comparison bs is just marketing.

Dragunov
06-13-07, 06:28 PM
I don't think OpenGL is death, cause they gonna release two major updates to it this year

LycosV
06-13-07, 06:48 PM
I am by no means a OpenGL/DirectX expert but from my experience the only significant advantage to OpenGL is that it's multiplatform. DirectX is significantly easier to program with, hence why more people use it.

GamblerFEXonlin
06-13-07, 07:24 PM
And, once again, we see only screenshots and go bananas (nana2)

Anyone remember Doom3 expansion implementing a "physics gun" ala Half Life 2? so you could actually play around with the few barrels in the game? Seems like John & Co. finally understood games are more then fancy textures.

In a recent statement, id software's John Carmack said that he didn't want more polygons. Instead, he wants "100 passes per polygon." (With each rendering "pass" a computer makes before it displays the graphics, more and more detail can be added.)
http://archive.gamespy.com/futureofgaming/engines/

No thanks me and my blind fillowers would rather have destructible objects, polygon blood, dismembered bodies and better physics. Depth, gameplay and satesfying animations (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dRx9Z4bP4pg) that is. So far due to lack of publicity vertex shaders has been very limited but thanks to unified shader architecture it is fixed.

http://jooh.no/root/omg_3dcards/G80/Vertex_Shader_processing_limit.png

jAkUp
06-13-07, 07:33 PM
OpenGL has been getting smaller and smaller for a while, I think it really depends on id's new engine adoption rate.

But then again, look how many people have already licensed UE3.

Gabrobot
06-13-07, 08:04 PM
Even 3d realms (for prey) took the kernel of the doom 3 engine and ripped it clean of opengl and into direct3d.

Uh, no the Xbox 360 version of Prey was reprogrammed for DirectX, but the PC version still uses OpenGL. id Software is also using DirectX for at least the Xbox 360 version of their game, and from what I've heard, the PC version as well (most likely OpenGL as well, ala Unreal Tournament 1/2003/2004). Fact is id Software and companies at their level can support both DirectX and OpenGL relatively easily. The features are the same, and the pixel shaders are the same...the only thing different is the specific API used to access the hardware's features. Otherwise everything else they do is the same.

flukester
06-13-07, 09:53 PM
Hahaha how amusing this thread became. Didn't think it would amount to much but..


OpenGL is not dead! FFS Unreal 3 supports both DirectX and GL. I also am not misleading anyone, I showed rendered pictures of DirectX9, 10 and GL 2.1. I didn't go and try and claim that those are in game renders either. I believe all the renders are what they are, regardless of who made them.

For those that don't believe UT supports GL go here, post on their forums if you like. UT has always supported both sides. Thank you.

http://wiki.beyondunreal.com/wiki/Unreal_Engine_Versions/3

I don't believe that DirextX is more superior than GL. Anything DirectX can do GL can do as well. Yes true it doesn't have a monopoly behind it that can throw million and millions of dollars into it. As someone said, it's another API.

Believe me or not but a prominent developer told me once that 'if anyone says GL is dead, they don't know their ass from their forehead'.

Carmack is not the only supporter GL and GL has had updates to it and is continually supported. GL is not just used by gaming developers it's used on many different levels.

GL to me more efficient and optimized API than DirectX. DirectX is a bloated pig because MS has allowed both ATI and nVidia to put their proprietary functions into it. DX10 is the major kiss ass version for both ATI and nVidia.

People develop for DirectX cuz MS kisses their respective ass, imo. Think about it, why don't ATI and nVidia argue? Because they don't have too!

GL 'is' the little guy because of Microsoft. GL has always, in my knowledge, been an organization that has reviewed and made decisions for the better good of it's supporters/gamers and developers. Not like Microsoft that lives to appease ATI and nVidia.

Another, imo, fact is ATI always stunk in GL. As far as I'm concerned they kissed up to MS and got them to include and craft DirectX to their liking. nVidia saw ATI's plans and hoping not to risk/lose market share jumped more onto DirectX. ATI imo has always been better in Direct3D. nVidia and 3DFX supported GL. And as far as I'm concerned nVidia bought up all 3DFX patents to ensure that if the shift to DirectX didn't happen they'd have the added bonus on ATI for GL.

If you look back a few years you will see the fights and stuff between nVidia and ATI for how to do this and do that. Well they don't have to fight anymore because MS now appeases both sides.

And like someone else said, remember that GL is "Open" platform. DirectX isn't.

I'll support GL way before I support anything from MS.



It just bugs me when people put down GL or when others put words in your mouth. I'm sorry I don't get off sitting and reading PC tech literature every day . I don't know what serial number is on what chip. I know only what I need to know because in my life I have more better things to do with my time than sit and try and be a know all of computers.

Anyhow, from the looks of those shots, to me, it appears GL is doing very well, whether it be renders or not it's obviously more than capable of producing what can be done with DirectX.

jolle
06-13-07, 10:04 PM
I showed rendered pictures of DirectX9, 10 and GL 2.1. I didn't go and try and claim that those are in game renders either. I believe all the renders are what they are, regardless of who made them.
Well most of the Images claimed to be OpenGL 2.1 are present in the Mudbox Gallery.
Mudbox is a digital sculpting tool to work with models at several milion polygons.
And they are rendered with some offline rendering package, not realtime and thus not with eitehr OpenGL or D3d.

http://www.mudbox3d.com/gallery/pages/BenKingsley.html
http://www.mudbox3d.com/gallery/pages/FaustoDeMartini_Armor_Open.html
http://www.mudbox3d.com/gallery/pages/HK_mud.html

EDIT
The top one: http://jacquesd.cgsociety.org/gallery/
Software used, Modo, Mudbox and Photoshop.. thats hardly realtime.
The Second one: http://faustodemartini.cgsociety.org/gallery/437431
Mudbox and rendered in 3dMax with the Brazil renderer.

jAkUp
06-13-07, 10:20 PM
Just so people know, that picture (the one in the link showing all the API comparisons) is bull****...many of those images are prerendered (the one in middle was made by an artist who now works at Blizzard), and the rest of it's pretty irrelevant.

Not to mention UT3 is also DX10.

I was not aware that they are supporting OpenGL again though, I think most of Sweeney's work is done in DX though.

jAkUp
06-13-07, 10:22 PM
BTW

Does anyone know if OpenGL 2.1 makes use of the Geometry Shader?

jolle
06-13-07, 10:27 PM
BTW

Does anyone know if OpenGL 2.1 makes use of the Geometry Shader?
No idea if there is a ARB extension for it.
But I do know that NV has their own. (NV_geometry_program4, NV_geometry_shader4)
http://developer.nvidia.com/object/nvidia_opengl_specs.html
They also list EXT_geometry_shader4, dunno what EXT means really.

flukester
06-14-07, 12:09 AM
Unreal 3 is NOT just DirectX. Why be so ignorant man? I mean if you are so adamant that it doesn't email Epic. GL that api supposedly dead :rolleyes: is very much supported. nVidia and ATI actually have worked together and developed/ing a lot of features for OpenGL. If you need a reference you can go here, it also discusses your Geometry shaders. http://www.gamedev.net/columns/events/gdc2006/article.asp?id=233. And maybe I am wrong, but it's my understanding Valve is even going to add more OpenGL support to Source...How someone can be so UP on DirectX is scary to me, cuz the last thing I want MS to have is a total foothold on gaming.

As for the renders, I was looking for GL renders and proof that GL wasn't dead even though I know it isn't. Shoot me, I found them near the end of my 'work day'. I've talked to lots of people I know in the industry and GL is nowhere near dead. I might not be knee deep into gaming these days but I still have established contacts who have been amongst some very successful projects. I trust their words and they've proven their wisdom over the years.

Anyhow, I'm not gonna argue this is just what I know and from a little research.

edit:
I see one of ya took it upon yourself to register on that site.. lol, but then I see no significance in anything of those pics and where did they come from and why go through the effort to mislead people?????

Rakeesh
06-14-07, 06:27 AM
Eh....OpenGL won't die. Not now, not later. Way in the future? Possibly. But certainly not anytime soon.

In case many of you haven't noticed, games aren't the only things that use 3D API's. OpenGL is pretty much the de-facto API used by graphics professionals, engineers, architects, and artists.

Can OpenGL die as far as games are concerned? Yes, that is definitely possible. It is possible that so few games use it, that the gaming IHV's start to allow opengl support to wither away in their drivers, kinda like what ATI is doing where opengl support is slow as sh*t and buggy on their cards, and then eventually nobody uses it for games. But for other applications where 3D graphics creation is used, it isn't likely.

Both the OpenGL fanboys and the DX10 fanboys need to pipe down IMO.

jolle
06-14-07, 08:16 AM
I think OpenGL might get a small infusion now with DX10 being only Vista.
Haze is another OpenGL game which looks really nice. (might be inherit from the PS3 that uses OGL afaik)
One which is supposed to use functionallity on the new DX10 hardware via OpenGL.. (hard to formulate that so noone has issues with it hehe)

and Fluke, whoever put together those images are either ignorant or trying to pull a fast one, not pinning any blame on you for that tho.

THe only relation is that some of the tools use OpenGL for viewport rendering.
MAX offers software, OGL and D3d, dunno about modo, assuming Mudbox and Zbrush use OpenGL in their viewports, pretty sure Maya does and it also offers some OpenGL acceleration of shadows in the Maya Software renderer (but not in Mental ray, unless I confused them)
And that is a field OpenGL will remain, since alot of these tools are multiplatform they need OpenGL even if some windows versions also offer DX9 atm (pretty good for game devs to realtime preview DX9 shaders in the viewport).
But that is where it started, and where it will remain aswell.

3DBrad
06-14-07, 09:05 AM
Yes, and viewport rendering usually slows down with OpenGL rendering, and 3DS Max even warns the user DX is best for viewport rendering,
http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p234/Spoudazo/lolcopter.gif

flukester
06-14-07, 10:44 AM
jolle thanks. Some of you just re-itterate what I was saying, which is cool. Ya Haze does look interesting and there are various other games that will support GL. Many companies have actually devoted time to bettering GL. GL is far from death or dying and hopefully it always stays a separate entity from Windows. There is always activity in the world of GL and you can see for yourself here http://www.opengl.org/ and again http://www.gamedev.net/columns/events/gdc2006/article.asp?id=233 which talks a lot of whats recently happened and whats coming.

Some HAZE PC shots.. http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/haze/images.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=gsimage&tag=images;img;4

3DBrad
06-14-07, 05:34 PM
I sure hope OpenGL keeps on improving, and I wouldn't mind if it surpassed DirectX, as Nvidia cards do GREAT in OpenGL.

However, I'm against misleading comparisons.:afro: