• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

OpenGL vs. DirectX

What's the better API?

  • OpenGL makes DirectX it's bitch

    Votes: 72 46.2%

  • both are about even

    Votes: 45 28.8%

  • M$ DirectX is king of API's

    Votes: 39 25.0%
  • Total voters
    156
J

jon_k

Gawd
Joined
Jul 29, 2004
Messages
567
I just want to get a good OpenGL vs. DirectX discussion going. Let's not even mention ATI or nVidia.

Personally I think OpenGL rocks. Whenever a game useing OpenGL is released it is always useing bleeding edge graphics. Quake III, Neverwinter Nights, Soldier of Fourtune II, Doom III - when every single one of these games were released they rocked graphics wise. OpenGL engine games seem more solid and stable too becasue OpenGL is cross-platform rather than windows based which will expose more bugs in developement which = better game engine.
 
I personally like DirectX more, because IMO, it has better graphics


but I should say, a games graphics are only as good as the developer wants them to look
 
In my experience OpenGL games have always been more stable and provided the smoothest frame rates...
 
I prefer opengl personally, the only problems ive had with it ever is a few games cant run in opengl with antialiasing without having problems, tribes2 comes to mind right now, but then again other games have problems with antialiasing in directx like halflife.
 
I'm an OGL guy. Just look at D3. OGL in the hands of a competant developer = sex. And it runs much better than Far Cry.
 
g3no said:
I prefer opengl personally, the only problems ive had with it ever is a few games cant run in opengl with antialiasing without having problems, tribes2 comes to mind right now, but then again other games have problems with antialiasing in directx like halflife.
Click to expand...

Actually Half-Life had an openGL renderer and i think it was the prefered renderer. I wonder if valve put in an OpenGL renderer this time.
 
jon_k said:
Actually Half-Life had an openGL renderer and i think it was the prefered renderer. I wonder if valve put in an OpenGL renderer this time.
Click to expand...

HL was based on the Quake engine so yes, it was OGL geared.
 
The Batman said:
HL was based on the Quake engine so yes, it was OGL geared.
Click to expand...

See this is what I'm saying that GL is better, becasue 60-70% of the highly anticipated games use OpenGL.
 
g3no said:
I prefer opengl personally, the only problems ive had with it ever is a few games cant run in opengl with antialiasing without having problems, tribes2 comes to mind right now, but then again other games have problems with antialiasing in directx like halflife.
Click to expand...

I run T2 on a 9800 in opengl with 2XAA and it works just fine....
 
Both are about equal depends on the proficiency of the programmer, I'm mainly a ogl programmer, could never get the same performance out of dx but my coworker is the opposite. Sability is equal too but its nice to be cross platform right off the bat hehe.
 
Oh yeah... remember when Tribes 1 was glide only acceleration? I cried for joy when I could finally play it accelerated with my TNT in OpenGL rather than in software mode :D
 
I don't know what effect OPENGL has on online play, but I feel like games run better online with opengl(ping-wise). Maybe it's just the ID engines though.
 
directx was a pain in the arse to use for so long, finally in ver 9.0 things are a lot easier, i still like openGL more, the quake3 engine was probably the longest lived game engine ever and that was for a reason.
 
Bumrush said:
I don't know what effect OPENGL has on online play, but I feel like games run better online with opengl(ping-wise). Maybe it's just the ID engines though.
Click to expand...

Probably just the ID engines becasue OpenGL dosen't have much to do with network activity. I know that ID wrote a custom communications engine for Quake III so they didn't have to use DIrectPlay not sure about DoomIII. Also I think Unreal uses a custom engine for communication as well so they can make it cross-platform.
 
I think DirectX is better, because if you don't have at least DX6 installed, you can't play Total Annihilation, king of games!

My 2 cents.
 
Dx is getting better but man its a pain to update engines in Dx, Dx8 to 9 not so bad, but before that wow.....
 
rancor said:
Dx is getting better but man its a pain to update engines in Dx, Dx8 to 9 not so bad, but before that wow.....
Click to expand...
i agree, but with the rate 9 is being improved, i think directx 10 might surpass openGL, the tech previews i have seen have been promising
 
avatar_of_might said:
i agree, but with the rate 9 is being improved, i think directx 10 might surpass openGL, the tech previews i have seen have been promising
Click to expand...

That's what OGL2 is for. ;)
 
avatar_of_might said:
i agree, but with the rate 9 is being improved, i think directx 10 might surpass openGL, the tech previews i have seen have been promising
Click to expand...


True but the thing with ogl anything that is done in dx can be done in ogl , just might take a bit more time to do though.
 
The Batman said:
I'm an OGL guy. Just look at D3. OGL in the hands of a competant developer = sex. And it runs much better than Far Cry.
Click to expand...

Why does Doom 3 require Direct X if it's an open gl game?
 
From a pure graphics standpoint OpenGL is great. Pretty much as good as Direct3D.

However, if this a comparison of OpenGL to DirectX it is not even close.

Mostly because DirectX is 5 times more than OpenGL

DirectX has built in support for Networking, Sound, 2D, 3D, and Interfaces (Joysticks, mice, keyboards, etc.)

Admittedly all these things need serious tweaking to use them in a real game, but the support for them is all built into DirectX.

Really this poll should have been about Direct3D vs. OpenGL because Direct3D is the only part of DirectX that directly compares.

And BTW, Direct3D is still better because if you chose OpenGL then you still have to either us DirectX for everything other than 3D, or you have to write your entire interface, sound, 2D, and networking code from the ground up. Even if you use DirectX for everything but 3D you still have to write lots of extra code to make the two different systems interface properly instead of using the code already built into DirectX. Either way using OpenGL is guaranteed to significantly extend the time it takes to complete a project, and as a gamer I really hate that fact.
 
hasnt it taken longer to develop half life 2 (directx) than doom 3 (opengl)? And to me, opengl is much smoother, i get alot of mouse lag in directx games like farcry and doom3 is perfect for me
 
I've always been able to get better performance out of Ogl. Just that what I'm used to though. really doesn't matter what api ya use theoretically cuase all the math is the same.
 
also, i know the stalker engine is directx based but what about the cryengine? i never found out about that one. if somebody could enlighten me that would be great. thanks.
 
avatar_of_might said:
also, i know the stalker engine is directx based but what about the cryengine? i never found out about that one. if somebody could enlighten me that would be great. thanks.
Click to expand...

It's DX, but it does support OGL.
 
oh yeah, btw, the game monolith is working: f.e.a.r. which looks just awesome, the physics is amazing itself not just the graphics, an ex-coworker told me its directx based. can anyone verify this?
 
well, being that I think Doom3 is the best video game to date, opengl has my vote. May change in the near future though.
 
arentol said:
From a pure graphics standpoint OpenGL is great. Pretty much as good as Direct3D.

However, if this a comparison of OpenGL to DirectX it is not even close.

Mostly because DirectX is 5 times more than OpenGL

DirectX has built in support for Networking, Sound, 2D, 3D, and Interfaces (Joysticks, mice, keyboards, etc.)

Admittedly all these things need serious tweaking to use them in a real game, but the support for them is all built into DirectX.

Really this poll should have been about Direct3D vs. OpenGL because Direct3D is the only part of DirectX that directly compares.

And BTW, Direct3D is still better because if you chose OpenGL then you still have to either us DirectX for everything other than 3D, or you have to write your entire interface, sound, 2D, and networking code from the ground up. Even if you use DirectX for everything but 3D you still have to write lots of extra code to make the two different systems interface properly instead of using the code already built into DirectX. Either way using OpenGL is guaranteed to significantly extend the time it takes to complete a project, and as a gamer I really hate that fact.
Click to expand...
OpenAL? Aren't there other programs that can handle those other things as well? The only benefit is DX is all one package, with OpenGL you have to do a bit of research. I still like OpenGL due to it's cross-platform compatibility.
 
crazedmodder said:
OpenAL? Aren't there other programs that can handle those other things as well? The only benefit is DX is all one package, with OpenGL you have to do a bit of research. I still like OpenGL due to it's cross-platform compatibility.
Click to expand...

Exactly. It is a myth that you have to write your own code for sound.

Long live open standards like OpenGL, Java, and to some degree, C/C++. As a Linux person, this is very important to me. There is no reason why companies can't use open standards, and allow the consumer to buy whichever hardware/OS they prefer.
 
OpenGL all the way man. There's plenty of open libraries you can use in commercial products for sound, networking, etc. Not to mention sometimes it's better to write your own stuff anyway, cause it integrates into your engine seamlessly.

That said, DirectX does have it's uses for fast turnaround time on windows-only platforms. Not to mention, from personal experience it's cake to port from PC to Xbox using a nice Direct3D renderer.

My biggest gripe about DirectX? Writing with Microsoft COM = Sucks a$$.
 
For smoothness...ogl no question about it. Dx is much better than it used to be in the early days however.
 
opengl. simply because its not directx, which means its not a project of microsoft's. you see, i have a blind hate for anything developed by microsoft regardless of its quality, and im a closeminded fool. i know nothing about graphics APIs, nor the pros or cons of each one. but when i get a chance to show my anti-MS sentiment, i go for it, because like i said before, im a closeminded fool that is too paranoid for my own good. :rolleyes:
 
my vote goes to OpenGL. i'm an id fan all the way, can't go wrong with John Carmack's programming. i think OpenGL's better because in the hands of the right programmer, it seems to be more optimized than directx, probably because you have more control over rendering paths than with directx, sure, it's more difficult to program for, but you get the best quality and performance in the end. also, as stated before, opengl is available on multiple platforms. and arentol, you are right about the whole OpenGL vs. DirectX thing, the two cannot be compared, OpenGL vs. Direct3d would be the right way of putting it. but you were wrong about having to use DirectX for sound, OpenAL can be used as an alternative.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top