PureBasic Forums - English

Here are a very interessting performance check result:

glSDL Benchmark v1.1
Video performance test of SDL using DirectDraw, OpenGL and software mode. Also, a test of DirectDraw and Direct3D have been included to compare it with SDL.

Link:
http://www.megastormsystems.com/bible_en.htm?Cur

FAZIT:
- OpenGL is fast
- OpenGL is OS independency

@Fred, what do you think about it?

Stop bothering fred.. But you CAN bother ME about it though.. if you want to know more PM me but dont say a word.. in fact, now that other people have read this.. I must kill them all . Just kiddin' * puts away the desert eagle *

And last but not least:

PB for MacOS supports OpenGL as the native GFX source.

Can't be quit, sorry....

Already told you by PM the why of my comments!

DirectX is the official (and fastest) API for Windows, i don't see any reason to switch to GL. Funny enough, MS willn't support complety OGL for the forthcoming Window Vista. See what I mean ?

You should know that... MS opengl dll works mostly on software mode.. its there for those who doesnt have a brand card... So Right now, no one can use MS' OGL dll for any game. It was never good, its all software, software is slow. Thats all, While NVIDIA and ATI (and the other poor ones) keeps on supporting opengl on their drivers, thats all you need. As when you install your ati drivers... or nvidia.. or any, the ms' ogl dll gets overwritten with the one your gfx card vendor developed.

That said, You'll have to use a good gfx card to use Vista, that means ms' poor dll will be overwritten when you install your gfx card drivers - I dont see the problem here . MS just doesnt want to "support" OpenGL anymore, why? Ever played MONOPOLY?... They got their DX..

DX Will be cross platform though. Thats what MS is aiming for.. taking over. Even that DX isnt the fastest nor the best. But you tell them to drop their lemon candy.

Not true (and I'm no MS fanboy!). They are upgrading "native" support from 1.1 to 1.4 for the first time in years. OK so (supposedly) it will be emulated on top of DX, or whatever,... but it's all mute anyway because the card manufacturers that provide the drivers not MS. OpenGL is growing in strength and to neglect is would be dangerous (especially if I meet you in person :twisted: )

I agree. Go OpenGL.

Windows can't drop it and they can try and wrap it all they want to work over DX, but like others have said, as long as ATI and Nvidia continue making GL drivers it'll be fine.

DX actualy is slower than GL. Its been proven many times, especially where large levels with complex structures need to be rendered.

dmoc wrote:.. and to neglect is would be dangerous (especially if I meet you in person )

lol. Persuasive!


Edit: Anyhow, we should support non-MS apps for MS sake. Otherwise everybody will stop writing for MS, and then MS will go broke because that "other" os now has all the good stuff.

opengl is fastest. And of course it is supported by m$.
EVEN IF the driver for vista is slower, vista will only be used on higher end [eg newer] machines wich NORMALY has a good gfx card. Well nor does it have to be a good card Geeforce 2 runs opengl just fine! very good compared to how it runs dx.
Also with my ATI radeon, if i have the choice, opengl is the one.!


Last but not least: it will probably be easier for you and the pb team if you only had to concentrate on 1 "gfx platform"


@dagcrack: i guess that windows will still be here loooong time. i use it myself and i enjoy it! i dont have much against m$, just the way to do their dirty buisness, and their prices!

Well, this is going to be a leisured discussion...

I've never seen any OpenGL application run faster than a DX one
on any of my GFX-cards (Ti4200, Radeon 9600, TNT and TNT2).
I programmed both APIs and even though I tried hard to optimise
on both sides, performance was never on par.

Personally I think DX feels so much more modern and well thought,
but that's just me.

Ah and yes, please don't start telling me I should update drivers or
something


Beside my personal experience, don't forget that OpenGL is absolutely
no competitor to DX when it comes to 2D graphics, sound, networking,
etc. - IMHO DX just can't be replaced. Where's the sense in using OpenGL
for graphics but DX for the rest?

It's good to have optional support for any and all APIs (see PB Linux
and its subsystems) but as for replacement... no way.

Well, the main developer of PB already said he won't drop DX support
and replace it by OpenGL - a wise choice IMHO


Just my 2ct.

Traumatic just expressed perfectly what i think about this subject .

traumatic wrote:Well, this is going to be a leisured discussion...

I've never seen any OpenGL application run faster than a DX one
on any of my GFX-cards (Ti4200, Radeon 9600, TNT and TNT2).
I programmed both APIs and even though I tried hard to optimise
on both sides, performance was never on par.

open your eyes

Won't update driver - well what do you expect!? I have used ogl for 2D as well and as far as optimising I got significant performance gain from moving to ogl. Many have said that ogl is "saner" than dx3d. And to compare non-gfx stuff is just dumb. And finally, just to state the bleedin' obvious, there is no dx on either Linux or OS X (perish the thought!).

PS: If ogl support in PB is dropped then I'd drop PB
PPS: What happened to Ogre lib (ogl version?)

PP(wtf)S: Someone soon will mention SDL (there, I did it)

SDL is just a layer, which is somewhat unflexible (while being perfect from a gaming only point of view). OpenGL isn't correctly supported by many gfx card (there isn't only NVidia or ATI card out of there) or the provided drivers just are slow. That's a fact, on Windows the standard is DX and gfx card manufacturer provides better optimized drivers for DX than GL. The fact than linux and macos x uses OpenGL isn't relevant in PB as stated before, and no, the forthcoming support fo opengl isn't dropped at all, it will just never became the default system.