• ### Announcements

#### Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

# OpenGL OpenGL and Windows XP

## Recommended Posts

Does anyone know what the deal is with OpenGL and XP, why does it run so slow? Seems like there is no hardware acceleration or something, any ideas?

##### Share on other sites

~~~~~~~~~~
FreeBSD.org - worship the Daemon!

##### Share on other sites
Get rid of XP. Maybe upgrade your ram to. THe thing takes 128 megs, even though they usually say 64. You probably want atlest 256 megs on your system

##### Share on other sites
XP is just fine. It''s most stable release of Windows since 3.11. Martee is right, get drivers for your video card that are rated as XP Compliant and you''ll be fine. And don''t worry too much about the ram issue, most computers these days have 128 and if so, you''ll be okay. And upgrading isn''t much of an issue either since it''s so cheap these days.

- Mike

P.S. If you need help locating, let me know which video card you have and I''ll tell you where to get the driver.

##### Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by mkaltner
It''s the most stable release of Windows since 3.11.

According to stress tests that would be NT 4.0. The more end user content that is added, the more possibilies for error there are.

[Resist Windows XP''s Invasive Production Activation Technology!]

##### Share on other sites
quote:

According to stress tests that would be NT 4.0. The more end user content that is added, the more possibilies for error there are.

No way! NT 4.0 is much less stable for me (where I work).

Of course, anecdotal evidence is always suspect, but I''ve never had a problem with 2k. Mind you, what I''ve seen of XP (at least on my system) isn''t that good (VC++ keeps crashing!) (still, I''ll wait for the first SP to make a proper decision, heh)

codeka.com - Just click it.

##### Share on other sites
Windows 3.11 stable? Umm isn''t that the one where an app could take the entire CPU up and not return control?

##### Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by Martee

~~~~~~~~~~
FreeBSD.org - worship the Daemon!

I have a Riva TNT2 32Mb videocard, but the newest driver from NVidia - XP-Detonator doesn''t help me with the problem with GL&XP, I think XP bugging on some video cards

##### Share on other sites
OK Scooter ...

Win2K is a fantastically stable OS ... ME and XP are not. They are both based on W2K ... but with many problems ... how many OS''s have you tried to run this on?

XP isn''t designed to support OpenGL, because it isn''t MS''s idea of the way forward ... Get a copy of W2K and then you''ll be OK

##### Share on other sites
I''ve worked with Win NT for years and now I use Win2k (though changing to Linux more and more). I was rather happy with NT stability, and I am *really* happy with Win2k, it is very stable (OK, for a Microsoft OS, doesn''t compare to Linux I tried WinXP, I was first horrified by the UI, changed it back to the original. But the stability is so much worse than 2k that I changed back a few days later.

##### Share on other sites
Why would anyone use windows when they knew enough to use linux, freebsd, mac, BeOs, etc..? You still get 3d(my linux nvidia setup outruns my windows, the most recent nvidia drivers are very stable with X). I mean I have NEVER had a crash with linux in 4 years. Not one. The worst thing that ever happened was X server locked because of a bug in the old nvidia drivers

##### Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by Witchcraven
Why would anyone use windows when they knew enough to use linux, freebsd, mac, BeOs, etc..?

Perhaps because they prefer Windows??

##### Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by halt
[quote]Original post by Martee

~~~~~~~~~~
FreeBSD.org - worship the Daemon!

I have a Riva TNT2 32Mb videocard, but the newest driver from NVidia - XP-Detonator doesn't help me with the problem with GL&XP, I think XP bugging on some video cards

Halt, same here. XP Detonator crashes XP the hell is up with that how can they release it as signed and it crash. Could you let me know if you find a solution or upgrade to this problem.?
BSoblesky@aol.com

Edited by - Scooter on October 30, 2001 12:19:56 AM

##### Share on other sites
Yeah, the NVidia XP drivers screw 2K (and reportedly 98) also for lots of people (including me). NVidia''s quality control really slipped up this time.

[Resist Windows XP''s Invasive Production Activation Technology!]

##### Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by Shag
Win2K is a fantastically stable OS ... ME and XP are not. They are both based on W2K ... but with many problems ...

WinME is based on Win9x, it is only a small up(down?)grade to win98. XP is just as stable as Win2k on my pc, but runs a lot smoother.

quote:
Original post by Shag
XP isn''t designed to support OpenGL, because it isn''t MS''s idea of the way forward ...

XP has an OpenGL D3D wrapper built into it so that even without OGL drivers from your card manufacturer you can run hardware accelerated OGL games. The speed isnt nearly as good as a proper OpenGL ICD, but its better than nothing. XP has just as much OGL support as 2k and 9x do.

##### Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by Scooter
[quote]Original post by halt
[quote]Original post by Martee

Halt, same here. XP Detonator crashes XP the hell is up with that how can they release it as signed and it crash. Could you let me know if you find a solution or upgrade to this problem.?
BSoblesky@aol.com

Edited by - Scooter on October 30, 2001 12:19:56 AM

I think the only way to get rid of this problem is upgrade a video card up to GeForce2, my TNT2 is noname and who knows, may be MicroSoft made XP to bug on Noname cards or they just want programmers make games on DirectX in spite of GL. I sent XP to ass and returned to W98SE.

##### Share on other sites
quote:

>quote:Original post by Witchcraven
>Why would anyone use windows when they knew enough to use linux, >freebsd, mac, BeOs, etc..?

Perhaps because they prefer Windows??

No, by god, surely not.

I use Windows because I have to, 3DSmax doesn''t run on Linux. But as I said above, I think Win2k isn''t that bad, it''s actually rather stable - WinXP is not. Next year, our company considers changing to Maya-4, this would be great, since there is a Linux version, or even better, an SGI version.

##### Share on other sites
Well, I do know enough to use Linux, FreeBSD, and MacOS. I''ve been doing so for the past two or three years. And yet I still prefer Windows. Hmm. Perhaps choice of operating system is a matter of opinion, and not "Linux is better! Anyone who doesn''t use Linux is teh suck!!"

##### Share on other sites
I quit using Linux because I needed actualy productivity beyond writing code (and the occasional GIMP graphics). Linux word processors still lag behind Windows (by far!): I believe it was the ApplixWare spellchecker that suggested pagoda for webpage ... I switched to Windows because it has a larger userbase; I swithced to Windows because it actually allows me to spend more time getting work done (believe it or not, though I''m excluding all 9x and earlier versions) than nursing my system. I can upgrade software in seconds (usually without even reading the README) under Windows; in Linux I have to read the readme, build the software and then run the config util (if they''re good), or manually tweak the .conf file to my satisfaction.

I''m not knocking Linux; I love it and still use it (it features prominently in some of my projects, particularly in "invisible OS" scenarios). But the attitude that "only a fool would use Windows when he knew enough to use Linux" is why Linux has not acheived maintsream status - a computer is a tool, not a status icon.

But we digress...

##### Share on other sites
Regarding linux:

a little joke between myself and one of the support guys at my company:

"FreeBSD is for people that love UNIX, Linux is for people that hate Microsoft"

With that said, no matter your flavor of *NIX, it''s limited. Yes, you can play games (a select few) and yes you can develop games (for people who use *NIX which is a very small percentage compared to Windows users) but it''ll never be windows.

Windows is the industry standard, like it or not. People at home, use Windows. People at work, use Windows. People who play games.... use Windows.

Certainly there are those who don''t, but they are, by no means, the majority.

One way or another, you''ll have to use it and like it if you want to develop games.

Now, regarding Windows XP:

There''ll always be people that bash it because it''s new, because it''s different, because it''s microsoft. But quite honestly, it''s stable. Very stable. I speak for more than myself when I say that I beleive it''s the most stable release yet.

Take into consideration what might be causing yours to be unstable.

Did you install XP over an already damaged system or did you do a new install on a clean partition?
Do you have high-quality hardware with high-quality drivers? Or do you have the cheapest you could find? Good drivers will make or break windows. They shouldn''t, but they do. If you go pick up a \$5 network card, chances are, it''s driver is horrible and will take your machine down. Or your sound card, or video card... Companies like Compaq, HP, Dell do it all the time. Put the cheapest hardware possible to raise profit margins. This cheap hardware often has poor drivers, if it hasn''t been hacked to work with the custom hardware in the first place.

Also, do you have the Microsoft Certified XP drivers for all your your hardware? If you don''t, you''ll have problems there, too. And you can''t bash XP for that reason because when 2000 came out, it had the same problem. Nothing worked for it and it took quite some time to get the latest, supported drivers. XP on the other hand had supported drivers quickly. At least by the major companies.

So that''s my post. Stop bashing things and the people that use them. I think the most important thing is to know all Operating Systems and like them all for their specific area of excellence.

- Mike

##### Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by mkaltner
"FreeBSD is for people that love UNIX, Linux is for people that hate Microsoft"

While I see why you say that, I can tell you that''s not always the case (as I''m sure you know). The only reason I haven''t tried other unixes is because they don''t have drivers for my video card, and if I''m going to be writing games I surely need hardware accelerated OpenGL . If I ever build a server I''m going to try a BSD, since I don''t need it to do anything with graphics. Someday...

[Resist Windows XP''s Invasive Production Activation Technology!]

##### Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by Witchcraven
Why would anyone use windows when they knew enough to use linux, freebsd, mac, BeOs, etc..? You still get 3d(my linux nvidia setup outruns my windows, the most recent nvidia drivers are very stable with X). I mean I have NEVER had a crash with linux in 4 years. Not one. The worst thing that ever happened was X server locked because of a bug in the old nvidia drivers

BeOS, quite sadly, is dying a slow death. I believe it has been sold and won''t be developed, at least on Intel. Shame - I was looking forward to their new GL support.

And I''ve crashed Linux too... I ran WINE

~~~
Cheers!
Brett Porter
PortaLib3D : A portable 3D game/demo libary for OpenGL
Community Service Announcement: Read How to ask questions the smart way before posting!

##### Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by brettporter
And I''ve crashed Linux too... I ran WINE

Linux wouldnt boot on one of my old systems, and X would crash and lock up the system on another. Both ran Windows without a single crash or error at all.

Redhat is also the only dist of linux that installs and runs fine on my main (ie this) pc as well. It would be nice if my ISP supported linux.

And for those that are going to say "Your ISP will work under linux, you just dont know how"... Im on a wireless connection, and there are no drivers for my receiver card. I have scoured the net, even trying drivers for remotely similar cards... nothing

##### Share on other sites
i used to use NT4 and found it VERY stable (the only thing that crashed it was when i tried to alt+tab out of a fullscreen DX app ). i upgraded to win2k and have had no problems with it. the system has NEVER frozen on me (apart from when i forgot to install the new detonator drivers), and only very occasionally do my apps crash, and they are mainly internet explorer and media player.

i cant comment on XP and personally i dont want to. it offers me nothing new apart from an even fancier interface. i upgraded to 2k out of nessecity (DX3 was getting on my nerves ).

when microsoft stop making directx for 2K, i MIGHT consider it, but only if the GL drivers are up to scratch. until then, i''m staying put with 2K.

MENTAL

• ### Forum Statistics

• Total Topics
627737
• Total Posts
2978873
• ### Similar Content

• Hello! As an exercise for delving into modern OpenGL, I'm creating a simple .obj renderer. I want to support things like varying degrees of specularity, geometry opacity, things like that, on a per-material basis. Different materials can also have different textures. Basic .obj necessities. I've done this in old school OpenGL, but modern OpenGL has its own thing going on, and I'd like to conform as closely to the standards as possible so as to keep the program running correctly, and I'm hoping to avoid picking up bad habits this early on.
Reading around on the OpenGL Wiki, one tip in particular really stands out to me on this page:
For something like a renderer for .obj files, this sort of thing seems almost ideal, but according to the wiki, it's a bad idea. Interesting to note!
So, here's what the plan is so far as far as loading goes:
Set up a type for materials so that materials can be created and destroyed. They will contain things like diffuse color, diffuse texture, geometry opacity, and so on, for each material in the .mtl file. Since .obj files are conveniently split up by material, I can load different groups of vertices/normals/UVs and triangles into different blocks of data for different models. When it comes to the rendering, I get a bit lost. I can either:
Between drawing triangle groups, call glUseProgram to use a different shader for that particular geometry (so a unique shader just for the material that is shared by this triangle group). or
Between drawing triangle groups, call glUniform a few times to adjust different parameters within the "master shader", such as specularity, diffuse color, and geometry opacity. In both cases, I still have to call glBindTexture between drawing triangle groups in order to bind the diffuse texture used by the material, so there doesn't seem to be a way around having the CPU do *something* during the rendering process instead of letting the GPU do everything all at once.
The second option here seems less cluttered, however. There are less shaders to keep up with while one "master shader" handles it all. I don't have to duplicate any code or compile multiple shaders. Arguably, I could always have the shader program for each material be embedded in the material itself, and be auto-generated upon loading the material from the .mtl file. But this still leads to constantly calling glUseProgram, much more than is probably necessary in order to properly render the .obj. There seem to be a number of differing opinions on if it's okay to use hundreds of shaders or if it's best to just use tens of shaders.
So, ultimately, what is the "right" way to do this? Does using a "master shader" (or a few variants of one) bog down the system compared to using hundreds of shader programs each dedicated to their own corresponding materials? Keeping in mind that the "master shaders" would have to track these additional uniforms and potentially have numerous branches of ifs, it may be possible that the ifs will lead to additional and unnecessary processing. But would that more expensive than constantly calling glUseProgram to switch shaders, or storing the shaders to begin with?
With all these angles to consider, it's difficult to come to a conclusion. Both possible methods work, and both seem rather convenient for their own reasons, but which is the most performant? Please help this beginner/dummy understand. Thank you!

• I want to make professional java 3d game with server program and database,packet handling for multiplayer and client-server communicating,maps rendering,models,and stuffs Which aspect of java can I learn and where can I learn java Lwjgl OpenGL rendering Like minecraft and world of tanks

• A friend of mine and I are making a 2D game engine as a learning experience and to hopefully build upon the experience in the long run.

-What I'm using:
C++;. Since im learning this language while in college and its one of the popular language to make games with why not.     Visual Studios; Im using a windows so yea.     SDL or GLFW; was thinking about SDL since i do some research on it where it is catching my interest but i hear SDL is a huge package compared to GLFW, so i may do GLFW to start with as learning since i may get overwhelmed with SDL.
-Questions
Knowing what we want in the engine what should our main focus be in terms of learning. File managements, with headers, functions ect. How can i properly manage files with out confusing myself and my friend when sharing code. Alternative to Visual studios: My friend has a mac and cant properly use Vis studios, is there another alternative to it?

• Both functions are available since 3.0, and I'm currently using glMapBuffer(), which works fine.
But, I was wondering if anyone has experienced advantage in using glMapBufferRange(), which allows to specify the range of the mapped buffer. Could this be only a safety measure or does it improve performance?
Note: I'm not asking about glBufferSubData()/glBufferData. Those two are irrelevant in this case.
• By xhcao
Before using void glBindImageTexture(    GLuint unit, GLuint texture, GLint level, GLboolean layered, GLint layer, GLenum access, GLenum format), does need to make sure that texture is completeness.

• 10
• 10
• 21
• 14
• 12