Archived

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

Funkodysse

OpenGL DirectX vs OpenGL

Recommended Posts

hi.. i have been doing some 3D with OpenGL and liked it because of its simplisity. and now im trying to learn Direct3D which is really a nightmare compared to openGL. OpengGL is so simple to learn and Direct3D is so hard, why is that?, 1. which one is the fastest Direct3D or OpenGL? 2. which tecniq is the most supported (graphics card)? 3. why is direct3D so difficult to learn compared to OpenGL? Edited by - Funkodysse on November 19, 2001 3:59:39 AM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous Poster
do a search for "D3D vs OGL" or "DirectX vx OpenGL" and read the bazillion useless arguments in all the threads.

Anyway, to somewhat answer your questions :

1) depends on the hardware, not the API,
2) on Windows and low end cards, D3D, on other platforms and high end cards, OGL,
3) DX is based on COM which has to be the ugliest paradigm in the world. As to why DX is using it, ask MS.

Hope this helps, and I hope someone will close this thread before it degenerates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by Funkodysse
i find is as nightmare.


Elaborate.

quote:

OpengGL is so simple to learn and Direct3D is so hard, why is that?,


I don''t know why you find it that way. I''m not you.

Before anyone think''s I''ve gone completely insane, I like to entertain these threads for a while and close them when they go insane. I''ll at least give people a chance.



Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous Poster
1.) Depends on the hardware. If the company can write better OpenGL drivers (like nVidia, although nVidia has a good balance)... than OpenGL.. if they can write better D3D drivers (like ATi)... than D3D. OpenGL runs much better under *nix, BeOS, Max OS (any version really).. simply because D3D can''t run under those (ok, under Linux with whine kinda.. but it''s not really D3D).

2.) Quake 3 = OpenGL, Unreal Tournament = DirectX... both accomplish the same thing. OpenGL is used for high end cad/rendering a LOT more often than DirectX, but I think in the games sector, it is equally split (used to be more DX, but I don''t think so anymore).

3.) D3D has a different coding format/setup/learning curve than OpenGL... I can''t say why you think it''s harder. I beleive it''s because OpenGL deals with a lot more of the math stuff for you though (although, I don''t use d3d, so I can''t really compare).

Billy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
glide is the best.

But seriously:

1. If you write bad code, both can be very slow. I used to sell bikes and people would ask "which bike is faster".... If you write good code, glide will be faster.

2. Both, but some cards do more than others. Glide is supported equally well on all new cards.

3. I find DX8 to be very similar to OpenGL, but different from glide.

Edited by - CrazedGenius on November 14, 2001 10:22:15 AM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah! And Glide looks much smoother then DX or OGL.. damn thing that it doesn''t support so many features and a high polygon count.

/MindWipe

"If it doesn''t fit, force it; if it breaks, it needed replacement anyway."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Both apis are state machines. As to why ms uses com is because they reinvent new interfaces each year so older apps could still work with new dx sdk. Also so you could use visual basic to write dx apps. I find both easy to use and understand. There is not much com in dx8 which looks c/c++ish nowdays for the end user, ofcourse internals are still com based. Ati likes opengl as they admit it in one of their pdf docs on vertex/pixel shaders I think. Nvidia also leans towards opengl. Nothing really important just my observations

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
it doesn''t matter anyway. how can you become a l33t coder if you can''t decide which API to use on your own. coding is difficult, PERIOD. regardless of what API, language, dev. kit, etc. you use. that''s why everyone isn''t making games that sell 1,000,000 the first time they touch a computer.

To the vast majority of mankind, nothing is more agreeable than to escape the need for mental exertion... To most people, nothing is more troublesome than the effort of thinking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by JD
Ati likes opengl as they admit it in one of their pdf docs on vertex/pixel shaders I think. Nvidia also leans towards opengl. Nothing really important just my observations

They both made press releases stating that the only way to get full access to their programmable shaders was through OpenGL''s extensions. They didn''t want people to only see "DirectX 8''s features" and not see their own hard work that didn''t get expossed in the API. However, it may not mean that they "lean" towards OpenGL.

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      627736
    • Total Posts
      2978856
  • Similar Content

    • By DelicateTreeFrog
      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!
    • By JJCDeveloper
      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
    • By AyeRonTarpas
      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?  
    • By ferreiradaselva
      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. 
  • Popular Now