Jump to content
  • Advertisement
Sign in to follow this  
KaiserJohan

OpenGL Jumping over to DirectX?

This topic is 1549 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

I've done some progress on learning OpenGL (models, textures, lights, point light/directional cascaded shadow maps, deferred rendering with msaa) and I'm pondering whether to make the jump over to DirectX.

 

pros:

  1. API design. As my rendering pipeline gets more complex, structuring all the various state calls into something easily understandable yet fast gets increasingly annoying, especially under some form of OOP. Is this the case for DirectX aswell? Is there a big difference?
  2. Debugging tools. AFAIK, Visual studio has built in performance and debugging tools for directx, while doing the same for opengl has proven so far to be a nightmare. There is gDEbugger (and CodeXL) but they simply don't work/crash, probably something with the window framework I'm using (GLFW 3) and it's OpenGL context switches. I work in windows under Visual studio anyway, so tight integration with debugging tools seems too good to be true.

cons:

  1. Supporting frameworks. I'm using GLEW for loading OpenGL, GLFW 3 for window management and GLM for math stuff. I have to say they are some of the best libraries I have used; my main issue with jumping to DirectX would be that I would have to get equivalent frameworks for that, and some searching has yielded basically NOTHING.
  2. Tutorials/references. The majority of what I have found seems to be OpenGL focused - DirectX guides seems kinda lackluster. Is this true?

Anyone mind chiming in with some feedback?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advertisement

You will get both side of the coin on this one..ultimately you will have to make the decision based on your experience with both. Without taking the plunge, you will never get a comprehensive unbiased evaluation of the two. I started out with DX 8.1 and continue throughout the years and the API has come a long way. DX used to be more forward thinking in terms of functionality, but there is parity between the 2 nowadays ( my opinion ). Currently, I'm leaning more to OpenGL because of its broad adoption across multiple devices and hardware configuration. The biggest gripe I have with DX now is the bonding of DX with OS ( need MS latest OS to use the latest DX features ). In the end they are both API to access the graphics HW for rendering/compute purposes.

For you pros and cons

Pro

1. DX is more structured that OpenGL and kudos to MS for giving that some thought. There are still different pipeline states to worry about, but again, the handling is much cleaner in DX.

2. Again, DX has the leg up on OpenGL for this one. I was a big fan of PIX ( RIP ), but there are plenty of tools out there for debugging D3D apps. The 2 that you mentioned on the OpenGL front are very good tools. I use CodeXL on a daily basis and the latest version is more stable. I also run AMD HW so I cannot comment on the stability on other HW, but it has been an invaluable tool to me. I've found 1 issue that causes it to crash/hang so avoid doing that, and so far so good.

Con:

1. As DX doesn't have an extension mechanism like OpenGL, there is not need for GLEW with DX. GLUT is a windowing utility toolkit thats tied to OpenGL so either you roll your own or use one of the may equivalent out there ex SDL. As GLM, there is nothing OpenGL inherent in math, the difference usually boils down to coordinate system convention, matrix storage layout etc..

2. The SDK documentation and samples ( installed with the SDK ) are very good and should be all you need to get your feet wet in DX.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#L.Spiro:

 

1. I would more likely say "welcome to light side". For me, the only strong argument why I'm using OpenGL in most of my applications is one - Linux (this counts especially when you're not developing games, but software for doing various high performance computations).

 

2. Comparing bare bones applications will show you larger difference in speed, than for case of F.e. full game. But generally yes, D3D will perform better.

 

#OP & thread generally:

 

I won't even mention debugging - under OpenGL we literally had to develop our own tools from scratch (they work well, but it took us hell a lot of time to create them).

 

Dealing with AMD vs NVidia vs any other vendor (and often driver versions) under OpenGL, with some recent features, is a bloody mess (I still remember moment, where one user of my applications had troubles with 3D textures and Intel gpu, that officially supported 3D textures extension (and also OpenGL version, where it was promoted into core), but once you sampled 3D texture inside shader, you were doomed.

 

So, as for me - go right away, switch to D3D.

Edited by Vilem Otte

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Small addition on tutorials/ learning DX11. You could buy the book '3D Game programming with DirectX11' by Frank D Luna), good learning curve and readability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll just add that how easy D3D is going to be for you will depend very much on how you're currently using OpenGL.  If you're used to modern OpenGL then you shouldn't have much problem translating the concepts over, but if you're still in glBegin/glEnd land you're likely to have an awful time.

 

If the latter is the case it may serve you better to do some research programs using modern OpenGL first, just to help you get a good understanding of the differences you're going to have to deal with when you port your main codebase (and to have that learning experience in a more familiar environment).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


You could buy the book '3D Game programming with DirectX11' by Frank D Luna

That's a great book; far better than any online tutorial I've seen.

With one exception: Luna uses D3DX. kunos already mentioned the DirectX toolkit libraries; these should be used instead in new code.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Two remarks as an addition:
- PIX works fine with dx11 applications (if 32bit)
- the book uses both DirectxMath as D3DX, I think this shouldn't you from learning a lot from the book in a good readable way with doable learning curve (you can adapt other libraries when you encounter d3dx stuff while your going through the book)

Share this post


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

  • Advertisement
×

Important Information

By using GameDev.net, you agree to our community Guidelines, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.

We are the game development community.

Whether you are an indie, hobbyist, AAA developer, or just trying to learn, GameDev.net is the place for you to learn, share, and connect with the games industry. Learn more About Us or sign up!

Sign me up!