Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

What DirectX version?


Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.

  • You cannot reply to this topic
14 replies to this topic

#1 DarkRonin   Members   -  Reputation: 616

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 13 May 2014 - 09:51 PM

Hi Guys,

 

In your opinion, I am just wondering if it is still worth (continuing) learning DirectX 9. Or is it time to stop beating a dead horse and move on to DirectX 11.

 

I know that if I go to DX11, I then lose XP as a target audience (which still has a reasonable market share). But, on the otherhand by the time I get proficient enough in DX11 XP will be even older.

 

So, what would your advice be? Move on and work with newer tech or keep learning old tech and keep the possibility of a wider audience?



Sponsor:

#2 kunos   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 2207

Like
6Likes
Like

Posted 13 May 2014 - 09:59 PM

no point in learning DX9.


Edited by kunos, 14 May 2014 - 03:21 AM.

Stefano Casillo
Lead Programmer
TWITTER: @KunosStefano
AssettoCorsa - netKar PRO - Kunos Simulazioni

#3 DarkRonin   Members   -  Reputation: 616

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 13 May 2014 - 10:06 PM

Awesome. That sort of backs up my suspicions smile.png



#4 SeanMiddleditch   Members   -  Reputation: 7144

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 13 May 2014 - 10:45 PM

lose XP as a target audience (which still has a reasonable market share)


~5% according to Steam. More if you count some developing markets. If the broadest base of users is your goal, you'll be writing OpenGL code anyway. Though I deeply recommend learning D3D11 first and OpenGL second.

#5 Anthony Serrano   Members   -  Reputation: 1245

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 13 May 2014 - 10:52 PM

For what it's worth, the latest Steam hardware survey shows that 94% of their Windows-using userbase is using Windows 7 or 8, so lacking XP support may not be a very big deal.

#6 Hodgman   Moderators   -  Reputation: 31799

Like
1Likes
Like

Posted 13 May 2014 - 11:51 PM

Yeah it's mostly only a big deal for China, where they have modern hardware but pirated XP is very popular -- in which case D3D9 is ok, but GL4 is also a possibility if you want modern features!



#7 DarkRonin   Members   -  Reputation: 616

Like
1Likes
Like

Posted 13 May 2014 - 11:59 PM

I tried looking into OpenGL about a month ago.

 

It was so confusing as there is no SDK as such available.

 

So, it makes it extremely difficult sifting around the net trying to figure out what is going on and what is the propper way to use OpenGL.

 

Like is it meant to be SDL, GLUT, [insert lib here]...?

 

Very very hard for anyone starting out with OpenGL. I tried for about a day and gave up hugely confused as to how to even start with it. All of the Google searches seem to point you in entirely different directions.



#8 phantom   Moderators   -  Reputation: 7558

Like
1Likes
Like

Posted 14 May 2014 - 01:34 AM

GL4 is also a possibility if you want modern features!


Except then you'll lose all the Intel hardware as they don't ship beyond 3.2 (I think it was two) and even that is patchy.
And when you get to 4.x you end up in the world of 'NV works but doesn't follow spec' and 'AMD claims but has bugs'.

Basically all gfx APIs suck.

(And don't even get me started on the clusterfuck which is Android and OpenGL|ES...)

#9 Hodgman   Moderators   -  Reputation: 31799

Like
6Likes
Like

Posted 14 May 2014 - 01:44 AM

Except then you'll lose all the Intel hardware as they don't ship beyond 3.2 (I think it was two) and even that is patchy.
And when you get to 4.x you end up in the world of 'NV works but doesn't follow spec' and 'AMD claims but has bugs'.

Basically all gfx APIs suck.

(And don't even get me started on the clusterfuck which is Android and OpenGL|ES...)

Hey! Hey, hey... It's simple, right. All you need is:
Win8.1 with latest GPUs - D3D11.1, or is it 11.2 now..?
WinVista+ - D3D11.
Win7+ with latest ATI GPUs - Mantle.
WinVista with no service pack updates - same as XP.
WinXP or Mac with latest nVidia GPUs - GL4.
WinXP or Mac with other GPUs - GL3.3.
WinXP or Mac with older GPUs that didn't work above - GL3.1.
Really old GPUs - D3D9 and/or GL2.1.
Android - OpenGL|ES, tweaked specifically for each individual device.
Web - WebGL, tweaked specifically for each browser, with a variety of "HTML5" fallbacks.
Linux - Try every version of GL and GL|ES in descending order until one seems to work.
Every game console - Something else entirely, specific to that console.



#10 mhagain   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 8275

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 14 May 2014 - 03:10 AM

Except then you'll lose all the Intel hardware as they don't ship beyond 3.2 (I think it was two) and even that is patchy.

And when you get to 4.x you end up in the world of 'NV works but doesn't follow spec' and 'AMD claims but has bugs'.

 

Intel are up to 4.2 with some 4.3 and 4.4 extensions available: http://www.g-truc.net/post-0655.html#menu

 

For 4.2 or lower their coverage at some GL_VERSIONs is actually better than AMD's, which should give you a good idea of how seriously AMD really are taking OpenGL (i.e "not very").

 

I'd also position the "NV supports things it shouldn't/AMD doesn't support things it should" crossover point at significantly lower than 4.x...


It appears that the gentleman thought C++ was extremely difficult and he was overjoyed that the machine was absorbing it; he understood that good C++ is difficult but the best C++ is well-nigh unintelligible.


#11 DarkRonin   Members   -  Reputation: 616

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 14 May 2014 - 03:44 AM

Damn guys! DirectX 11 it is then - LOL

#12 TheChubu   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 4755

Like
1Likes
Like

Posted 14 May 2014 - 04:13 AM


Basically all gfx APIs suck.
This.

 

Dude, just... just pick something. I dunno, throw a coin.


"I AM ZE EMPRAH OPENGL 3.3 THE CORE, I DEMAND FROM THEE ZE SHADERZ AND MATRIXEZ"

 

My journals: dustArtemis ECS framework and Making a Terrain Generator


#13 DarkRonin   Members   -  Reputation: 616

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 14 May 2014 - 04:18 AM

Pretty much have now.

 

It was always between DX9c or DX11.

 

OpenGL was never in the running. smile.png



#14 dilyan_rusev   Members   -  Reputation: 1067

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 14 May 2014 - 06:31 AM

Although I don't develop for OpenGL, I watched a nice introductory video for OpenGL on non-Windows platforms, but it applies to Windows, too I guess.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeMPCSqQ-34



#15 Alessio1989   Members   -  Reputation: 2129

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 14 May 2014 - 08:56 AM

Go with DirectX 11 and beyond: when you will achieve a decent skill to product something, even in China targeting XP will be probably a wast of time. There are a lot of DX11 tutorials ("legacy" directx sdk, microsoft "modern" directx samples on msdn gallery, amd radeon sdk, nvidia "legacy" dx11 sdk, new nvidia dx11 sdk, intel samples, and many online basic tutorials and a decent number of books).

OpenGL 4x/ES? Yes, that's an alternative, multi-os, open&cool, you will be a Penguins' saviour and Stallman&co will be happy... But first you have to consider some issue that happen/apply on/to OpenGL development (and not to DirectX development):

- Driver status: http://richg42.blogspot.it/2014/05/the-truth-on-opengl-driver-quality.html
- Differences between theory and practice: http://richg42.blogspot.it/2014/05/things-that-drive-me-nuts-about-opengl.html

You should also consider to use some high-level wrapper API like SDL: it will contains some of the OpenGL development headaches.

Edited by Alessio1989, 14 May 2014 - 09:00 AM.

"Software does not run in a magical fairy aether powered by the fevered dreams of CS PhDs"





Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.



PARTNERS