2.png)
ATI Catalyst OpenGL error...
category: general [glöplog]
Is D3D only one API anyway?
Quote:
performance would be an obvious reason (esp. batching performance)
wrong?
opengl works on platforms other than windows vista. that's quite a big attraction if you ask me.
Quote:
Is D3D only one API anyway?
Yes? D3D is part of DX... and every linux zealot knows microsoft sucks.
so one would say that after weighing all your factors you end up with a decision for a specific platform, right?
seemingly this is kind of hard to comprehend
this makes me curious - what horrendous driver/architectural inefficiency is in either of the apis that makes this a factor that influences choice of api?
seemingly this is kind of hard to comprehend
Quote:
performance would be an obvious reason (esp. batching performance)
this makes me curious - what horrendous driver/architectural inefficiency is in either of the apis that makes this a factor that influences choice of api?
well, from a vista pov, the fact that ogl runs in a wrapper onto dx might be a horrendous inefficiency :D using ogl just because it works on other platforms is bull... why gaming in linux? you eat soup with a fork too?
There are applications demanding high-performance 3D-graphics other than games. OpenGL works on Win/Mac/"all" Unixes, try to do that with Direct3D...
OpenGL works on Vista, with ATI chips, without wrappers of any kind.
Only with the latest driver release (7.10) did Fairplay to the Queen finally run (the robot was fucked up, but no errors) on my mobility x1600 (vista or xp), but screwed up lifeforce.
Only with the latest driver release (7.10) did Fairplay to the Queen finally run (the robot was fucked up, but no errors) on my mobility x1600 (vista or xp), but screwed up lifeforce.
Quote:
There are applications demanding high-performance 3D-graphics other than games. OpenGL works on Win/Mac/"all" Unixes, try to do that with Direct3D...
one might wonder if the graphics api used is the kind of abstraction you want to make, even for different os'es on a single hardware platform
nonetheless all this pro-con talk is useless, everyone makes a decision based on different factors and that's that
(still, there are stupid decisions but thats a whole other ballpark)
Quote:
Quote:performance would be an obvious reason (esp. batching performance)
this makes me curious - what horrendous driver/architectural inefficiency is in either of the apis that makes this a factor that influences choice of api?
Actually, batching is a factor to consider. Both OpenGL and DirectX should call kernel functions eventually, however OpenGL allows the implementation to have a batching layer, while DirectX doesn't (that has changed with DX10 by the way). That means OpenGL could _theoretically_ spare a lot of kernel function calls by batching commands. And switching to kernel level takes a considerable amount of time.
However, in practice, other things are more important than that. My vote is for D3D currently, but OGL3 is very promising.
Quote:
the fact that ogl runs in a wrapper onto dx
I've never seen any trace of that magical OpenGL-to-DirectX converter thingie in the real world. Either you get unaccelerated software-rendered OpenGL 1.1 (like in XP) or you get full OpenGL 2.x acceleration by the chip manufacturer's ICD (also like in XP). So, no, there's nothing wrong with OpenGL on Vista.
True. MS wanted to do it, but a whole lot of people kept complaining (and were right about it) and MS dropped it.
They haven't been updating their OGL development headers and interface (still OGL 1.3 in VS2005!!!) since I don't know when. One reason that many people develop with D3D is that MS support is far superior.
They wanted to drop OGL acceleration from Vista. IMHO it's clear that they want to push OGL out of Windows asap.
Graphics card companies have been developing their own ICDs for ages now. MS doesn't even have work with that...
just random thoughts ;)
They haven't been updating their OGL development headers and interface (still OGL 1.3 in VS2005!!!) since I don't know when. One reason that many people develop with D3D is that MS support is far superior.
They wanted to drop OGL acceleration from Vista. IMHO it's clear that they want to push OGL out of Windows asap.
Graphics card companies have been developing their own ICDs for ages now. MS doesn't even have work with that...
just random thoughts ;)
rarefluid: It's the OpenGL 1.1 header that is in Visual Studio 2005, not 1.3.
oh. I was being optimistic. sry ;)
just make sure it doesn't happen again, ok?