• Advertisement
Sign in to follow this  

OpenGL The state of Direct3D and OpenGL in 2012?

This topic is 2105 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

So, sorry if I'm posting in the wrong thread, or this question is off-topic or anything of the sort,
but,
What is the current state of the two major (and only, I'm pretty sure) graphics API's, direct3d and opengl? Which one is more popular among game developers? Or just developers in general?
I have seen more games being ported to Mac OS X, with the rise of Steam, games such as all the Valve games, and also many games are using OpenGL to be able to support mobile platforms such as Android and iOS as well. And while this isn't exactly prominent, WebGL is also seems to be slowly becoming popular (more popular than flash it would seem for games at least). But with Direct3D for both Windows platforms and the Xbox, not to mention XNA, there is also a lot to be seen in those areas.

So, my question is, is the market leaning to one API over the other? Which one? Is it shifting at all, or is it stagnant? Is there anything in either API that has promise for the future?

I basically am just curious about the current state of the two API's in comparison to the other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advertisement
Both work fine, D3D's much nicer, usually your platform dictates the choice. That's pretty much it. At the end of the day, learning modern GL (ie 4.0 and ES 2.0) prepares you for most of the non-Windows platforms you're likely to see, and that makes it a compelling choice even though the API itself is fairly shoddy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The API is largely irrelevant - if you learn one of (modern) OpenGL or Direct X, you should be able to pick up the gist of the other in a couple of days.

Provided, of course, that you actually learned the theory at the same time smile.png Edited by swiftcoder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In my own experience OpenGL is alot easier to learn for a beginner. DirectX is a little more diffucult. But like switftcoder said learn one and you should pick the other up pretty quickly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I forgot to mention, also, that both APIs are essentially a minor part of your code these days. Once you've got the concepts down, it's more just a question of wiring up the API to do things the way you need. It seems like a really big deal as a beginner to be coding all this D3D or OGL stuff, but I can honestly say it's probably the most boring part of my graphics coding work. The API is just a machine I have to configure so that my CPU code and my GPU code talk to each other properly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can't speak for every game developer, but we work with whatever API is available on the hardware. Windows is the only place we have a choice, and we happen to use D3D11. I'm sure other studios use OpenGL on Windows. Personally you'd have to pay me a *lot* of money to choose GL over D3D11 on Windows, but that's just me. smile.png Most people probably wouldn't care that much. Edited by MJP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my own experience OpenGL is alot easier to learn for a beginner. DirectX is a little more diffucult. But like switftcoder said learn one and you should pick the other up pretty quickly.
I disagree. Even comparing oldschool GL to D3D9, there are very few things where GL is truly easier. My transition from GL to D3D9 has been rough at best, mostly because GL actually shaped my line of thinking to its model. In the end this does not matter: D3D11 provides a much better environment for learning and it's not like writing a transform shader is a big problem.

I think the state of GL is pretty sad. Not as sad as it was a couple of years ago when Mt. Evans was not released and they gave us scraps but almost there. Well, at least they have feature parity. No wait, they don't (CS not part of the API as far as I understand).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No wait, they don't (CS not part of the API as far as I understand).


There is OpenCL which includes interop extensions for OpenGL...

Personally I very much prefer OpenGL (I hate the DX API, the left handed coordinate system, and the row vectors... why can't they use the same conventions used in pretty much every math book around?!), but considering the fact that nVidia has been crippling OpenGL performance on non-Quadro cards...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bingo! Are GL and CL the same thing? No. Can they interop? Sure, that's pretty different thing from CS anyway. Learn an ecosystem instead of an API. And write the code interfacing them.
BTW, shader driven D3D is column-major as well. But anyway, personal opinions are thing we could discuss a long way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
These days there's very little difference at API level between modern OpenGL and modern D3D. They work in very much the same way and you'll be writing the same kind of code with each.

D3D has, at least since version 9, been column-major internally, and the D3DX matrix library has always been able to generate either LH or RH co-ordinate systems. These are complete non-issues.

OpenGL is certainly easier to get a first triangle on the screen, put a texture on it, light it and make it spin, but that pre-supposes that you're using immediate mode and the fixed pipeline. If you want to write high-performance code with non-trivial effects things become a lot more equal, with D3D edging ahead a little owing to less legacy API cruft and a cleaner, more sensible design (no bind-to-modify, separation of buffer/offset from vertex attrib definitions, explicit registers in shaders, etc). Nothing insurmountable, but somewhat annoying to have to deal with.

D3D still has better driver quality and better tools. Documentation is a mixed bag - the D3D9 documentation is excellent, D3D10 is mostly alright, and D3D11 has it's moments but can be quite dreadful in places, with some fundamental errors that persisted for far longer than they should have (I'm specifically thinking of DstX/DstY/DstZ in CopySubresourceRegion here). The GL documentation is quite good but lack of a downloadable SDK and searchable help file hampers it, IMO. The spec PDF is something, but not enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is all about concepts. Once you know the concept an Api is just an Api.


Agreed. I'm learning opengl because I want to write games that are capable of being played on many different platforms, but I suppose that once I've really gotten a grasp on the fundamentals, a switch over the D3D shouldn't be too difficult.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Advertisement
  • Advertisement
  • Popular Tags

  • Advertisement
  • Popular Now

  • Similar Content

    • By LifeArtist
      Good Evening,
      I want to make a 2D game which involves displaying some debug information. Especially for collision, enemy sights and so on ...
      First of I was thinking about all those shapes which I need will need for debugging purposes: circles, rectangles, lines, polygons.
      I am really stucked right now because of the fundamental question:
      Where do I store my vertices positions for each line (object)? Currently I am not using a model matrix because I am using orthographic projection and set the final position within the VBO. That means that if I add a new line I would have to expand the "points" array and re-upload (recall glBufferData) it every time. The other method would be to use a model matrix and a fixed vbo for a line but it would be also messy to exactly create a line from (0,0) to (100,20) calculating the rotation and scale to make it fit.
      If I proceed with option 1 "updating the array each frame" I was thinking of having 4 draw calls every frame for the lines vao, polygons vao and so on. 
      In addition to that I am planning to use some sort of ECS based architecture. So the other question would be:
      Should I treat those debug objects as entities/components?
      For me it would make sense to treat them as entities but that's creates a new issue with the previous array approach because it would have for example a transform and render component. A special render component for debug objects (no texture etc) ... For me the transform component is also just a matrix but how would I then define a line?
      Treating them as components would'nt be a good idea in my eyes because then I would always need an entity. Well entity is just an id !? So maybe its a component?
      Regards,
      LifeArtist
    • By QQemka
      Hello. I am coding a small thingy in my spare time. All i want to achieve is to load a heightmap (as the lowest possible walking terrain), some static meshes (elements of the environment) and a dynamic character (meaning i can move, collide with heightmap/static meshes and hold a varying item in a hand ). Got a bunch of questions, or rather problems i can't find solution to myself. Nearly all are deal with graphics/gpu, not the coding part. My c++ is on high enough level.
      Let's go:
      Heightmap - i obviously want it to be textured, size is hardcoded to 256x256 squares. I can't have one huge texture stretched over entire terrain cause every pixel would be enormous. Thats why i decided to use 2 specified textures. First will be a tileset consisting of 16 square tiles (u v range from 0 to 0.25 for first tile and so on) and second a 256x256 buffer with 0-15 value representing index of the tile from tileset for every heigtmap square. Problem is, how do i blend the edges nicely and make some computationally cheap changes so its not obvious there are only 16 tiles? Is it possible to generate such terrain with some existing program?
      Collisions - i want to use bounding sphere and aabb. But should i store them for a model or entity instance? Meaning i have 20 same trees spawned using the same tree model, but every entity got its own transformation (position, scale etc). Storing collision component per instance grats faster access + is precalculated and transformed (takes additional memory, but who cares?), so i stick with this, right? What should i do if object is dynamically rotated? The aabb is no longer aligned and calculating per vertex min/max everytime object rotates/scales is pretty expensive, right?
      Drawing aabb - problem similar to above (storing aabb data per instance or model). This time in my opinion per model is enough since every instance also does not have own vertex buffer but uses the shared one (so 20 trees share reference to one tree model). So rendering aabb is about taking the model's aabb, transforming with instance matrix and voila. What about aabb vertex buffer (this is more of a cosmetic question, just curious, bumped onto it in time of writing this). Is it better to make it as 8 points and index buffer (12 lines), or only 2 vertices with min/max x/y/z and having the shaders dynamically generate 6 other vertices and draw the box? Or maybe there should be just ONE 1x1x1 cube box template moved/scaled per entity?
      What if one model got a diffuse texture and a normal map, and other has only diffuse? Should i pass some bool flag to shader with that info, or just assume that my game supports only diffuse maps without fancy stuff?
      There were several more but i forgot/solved them at time of writing
      Thanks in advance
    • By RenanRR
      Hi All,
      I'm reading the tutorials from learnOpengl site (nice site) and I'm having a question on the camera (https://learnopengl.com/Getting-started/Camera).
      I always saw the camera being manipulated with the lookat, but in tutorial I saw the camera being changed through the MVP arrays, which do not seem to be camera, but rather the scene that changes:
      Vertex Shader:
      #version 330 core layout (location = 0) in vec3 aPos; layout (location = 1) in vec2 aTexCoord; out vec2 TexCoord; uniform mat4 model; uniform mat4 view; uniform mat4 projection; void main() { gl_Position = projection * view * model * vec4(aPos, 1.0f); TexCoord = vec2(aTexCoord.x, aTexCoord.y); } then, the matrix manipulated:
      ..... glm::mat4 projection = glm::perspective(glm::radians(fov), (float)SCR_WIDTH / (float)SCR_HEIGHT, 0.1f, 100.0f); ourShader.setMat4("projection", projection); .... glm::mat4 view = glm::lookAt(cameraPos, cameraPos + cameraFront, cameraUp); ourShader.setMat4("view", view); .... model = glm::rotate(model, glm::radians(angle), glm::vec3(1.0f, 0.3f, 0.5f)); ourShader.setMat4("model", model);  
      So, some doubts:
      - Why use it like that?
      - Is it okay to manipulate the camera that way?
      -in this way, are not the vertex's positions that changes instead of the camera?
      - I need to pass MVP to all shaders of object in my scenes ?
       
      What it seems, is that the camera stands still and the scenery that changes...
      it's right?
       
       
      Thank you
       
    • By dpadam450
      Sampling a floating point texture where the alpha channel holds 4-bytes of packed data into the float. I don't know how to cast the raw memory to treat it as an integer so I can perform bit-shifting operations.

      int rgbValue = int(textureSample.w);//4 bytes of data packed as color
      // algorithm might not be correct and endianness might need switching.
      vec3 extractedData = vec3(  rgbValue & 0xFF000000,  (rgbValue << 8) & 0xFF000000, (rgbValue << 16) & 0xFF000000);
      extractedData /= 255.0f;
    • By Devashish Khandelwal
      While writing a simple renderer using OpenGL, I faced an issue with the glGetUniformLocation function. For some reason, the location is coming to be -1.
      Anyone has any idea .. what should I do?
  • Advertisement