Quote:Original post by D3DXVECTOR3 Im not really sure about this but opengl or d3d are just api's to talk to the hardware. So a game running in opengl or d3d will look the same on the same graphics card. Its the graphics card that does the rendering... right?
True, they both use the same underlying hardware so (in theory) they should both look the same.
But...
What sort of commands they issue to that hardware is a different kettle of fish. A Direct3D lighting function might not go about creating the lighting effect in the same way as an OpenGL lighting function. Therefore there can be visual differences between the two APIs- since each has its own little way of doing things.
Quote:Original post by rebelcoder I will continue to program in using OpenGL but i am concerned about the future of our beloved API.
Don't be. GL is extending into every platform out there included mobile phones and the next generation of the Playstation. However, D3D is a serious competition to GL. I hope more game developers switch to it, like the boys at Valve.
Ah I am not 100% sure on this but Valve is using DX9 for HL2 not OpenGL...
Yes, it uses DX, that's why I said "I hope more game developers switch to it, like the boys at Valve."
//edit// Ooops, sorry. Bad english there. I should have said "starting with the boys at Valve".
[Edited by - V-man on April 25, 2005 5:58:57 PM]
Sig: http://glhlib.sourceforge.net an open source GLU replacement library. Much more modern than GLU.
float matrix[16], inverse_matrix[16];
glhLoadIdentityf2(matrix);
glhTranslatef2(matrix, 0.0, 0.0, 5.0);
glhRotateAboutXf2(matrix, angleInRadians);
glhScalef2(matrix, 1.0, 1.0, -1.0);
glhQuickInvertMatrixf2(matrix, inverse_matrix);
glUniformMatrix4fv(uniformLocation1, 1, FALSE, matrix);
glUniformMatrix4fv(uniformLocation2, 1, FALSE, inverse_matrix);
There is the home user and CAD/pro market that gl satisfies. If the home market becomes d3d driven then you still have the pro market that use gl. However, gl is so deeply entrenched that for all practical purposes it's never going away unless the shape and form of computer changes. But we should never forget to use the best tools for our job and if d3d 10 proves to be above gl then it makes sense to consider checking it out. Then again if you're satisfied with whatever api you prefer then you don't need to change. I prefer gl but am well versed in d3d as well. I had hard time seeing visual differences between them and if you do these comparisons make sure you do them with the same company. I would think nvidia has faster gl than d3d driver a year ago but am not sure of today. I think their gl was 1.5 to 2x faster over their d3d in my doom3 type renderer. I heard Cass say that nvidia is concentrating on d3d these days so I would think their d3d was close to their gl. I think there is also an issue of switching out of os ring levels so d3d takes a hit there as gl runs in user space as I understand it.
Quote:Original post by JD I heard Cass say that nvidia is concentrating on d3d these days
further info to my ps3 rant, nvidia are making graphics chip for the ps3 (that cliche 'its gonna rock' is prolly applicaple, cell cpu architecture + a gpu which is better than a 6800)
