Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Tale of OpenGL vs. Direct3D

programmers.stackexchange.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–38 of 38 posts

Re: The Tale of OpenGL vs. Direct3D

#31

Post by rvkennedy »

The article misses one of the more interesting recent developments - that via OpenGL ES, GL is effectively doing an end-run around the whole Direct3D roadblock. As several posters have mentioned, GL ES is the standard in all the major mobile platforms. Now WebGL is threatening, not without some MS pushback, to become the standard for native 3D on the web.

Almost by default - simply because DX is a Windows/Xbox technology, and these platforms (particularly Windows, but also the traditional consoles) are fading - and GL is ruling the new world of games - online games, Facebook games, web and so on.

It's rare indeed on HN to see much talk of Microsoft's continuing dominance, because in the web/tech world, that dominance doesn't exist. Games are changing too. And it's games we're talking about here - OpenGL has always run the show in serious applications of 3D, and that shows no signs of abating.

Re: The Tale of OpenGL vs. Direct3D

#32

Post by brudgers »

ANH wrote: post #30

Another thing that isn't exactly helping OpenGL is Apple's slow creeping adoption of recent versions. I'm running the latest Snow Leopard and my code is reporting OpenGL 2.1. I'm not really blaming Apple. I mean, on top of the core version they've implemented about 100 extensions with names like GL_ATI_separate_stencil, GL_NV_fragment_program2, GL_ARB_instanced_arrays, etc.. But the OpenGL 4.1 specs were released a y…

I would suggest that Apple's historic attitude toward the Mac as a gaming platform is reflected in the effort your graphic engine provider invested in creating drivers for each OS and in the case of OSX perhaps a driver specification which may stifle flexibility - for example NVIDIA's latest Snow Leopard driver is designed so that it runs on everything from chipset to worksation graphics engine. [http://www.nvidia.com/object/quadro-macosx-256.02.25f01-driv...]

Re: The Tale of OpenGL vs. Direct3D

#33

Post by ANH »

brudgers wrote: post #32
ANH wrote: post #30

Another thing that isn't exactly helping OpenGL is Apple's slow creeping adoption of recent versions. I'm running the latest Snow Leopard and my code is reporting OpenGL 2.1. I'm not really blaming Apple. I mean, on top of the core version they've implemented about 100 extensions with names like GL_ATI_separate_stencil, GL_NV_fragment_program2, GL_ARB_instanced_arrays, etc.. But the OpenGL 4.1 specs were released a y…

I would suggest that Apple's historic attitude toward the Mac as a gaming platform is reflected in the effort your graphic engine provider invested in creating drivers for each OS and in the case of OSX perhaps a driver specification which may stifle flexibility - for example NVIDIA's latest Snow Leopard driver is designed so that it runs on everything from chipset to worksation graphics engine. [ http://www.nvidia.c…

I didn't have games in mind, really. I am not developing one.

I would suggest Apple could do a better job of keeping up to date with more recent OpenGL specifications. In fact, I am suggesting it.

Re: The Tale of OpenGL vs. Direct3D

#34

Post by brudgers »

ANH wrote: post #33
brudgers wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would suggest that Apple's historic attitude toward the Mac as a gaming platform is reflected in the effort your graphic engine provider invested in creating drivers for each OS and in the case of OSX perhaps a driver specification which may stifle flexibility - for example NVIDIA's latest Snow Leopard driver is designed so that it runs on everything from chipset to worksation graphics engine. [ http://www.nvidia.c…

I didn't have games in mind, really. I am not developing one. I would suggest Apple could do a better job of keeping up to date with more recent OpenGL specifications. In fact, I am suggesting it.

The ability to support a particular OpenGL standard is dependent on the hardware (software implementation aside). It is not something that Apple can choose to implement on less capable hardware. That's almost certainly why both Windows and Mac are running OpenGL 2.1 - OpenGL 2.1 is all the hardware will support.

On the other hand, based on your report it appears that NVIDIA has invested more effort in the performance of their Windows driver than in the performance of their Mac driver. Given their economic interests and the fact that many people using their hardware under Windows are NVIDIA customers whereas the vast majority of people using their hardware are Apple customers, it is hardly surprising that they would do so.

I will point out that for people who give a high priority to 3d graphic performance, there is little reason to select an Apple product - a meaningful range of hardware options simply does not exist and the drivers simply receive less attention. Keep in mind that one of the major differences between workstation class graphics cards such as NVIDIA's Quadro and gaming cards is the quality of the drivers - the same GPU's are often used in both segments with driver performance justifying much of the cost premium workstation cards command.

Re: The Tale of OpenGL vs. Direct3D

#35

Post by [deleted] »

brudgers wrote: post #34
ANH wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't have games in mind, really. I am not developing one. I would suggest Apple could do a better job of keeping up to date with more recent OpenGL specifications. In fact, I am suggesting it.

The ability to support a particular OpenGL standard is dependent on the hardware (software implementation aside). It is not something that Apple can choose to implement on less capable hardware. That's almost certainly why both Windows and Mac are running OpenGL 2.1 - OpenGL 2.1 is all the hardware will support. On the other hand, based on your report it appears that NVIDIA has invested more effort in the performance…

[deleted]

Re: The Tale of OpenGL vs. Direct3D

#36

Post by [deleted] »

brudgers wrote: post #34
ANH wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't have games in mind, really. I am not developing one. I would suggest Apple could do a better job of keeping up to date with more recent OpenGL specifications. In fact, I am suggesting it.

The ability to support a particular OpenGL standard is dependent on the hardware (software implementation aside). It is not something that Apple can choose to implement on less capable hardware. That's almost certainly why both Windows and Mac are running OpenGL 2.1 - OpenGL 2.1 is all the hardware will support. On the other hand, based on your report it appears that NVIDIA has invested more effort in the performance…

[deleted]

Re: The Tale of OpenGL vs. Direct3D

#37

Post by ANH »

brudgers wrote: post #34
ANH wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't have games in mind, really. I am not developing one. I would suggest Apple could do a better job of keeping up to date with more recent OpenGL specifications. In fact, I am suggesting it.

The ability to support a particular OpenGL standard is dependent on the hardware (software implementation aside). It is not something that Apple can choose to implement on less capable hardware. That's almost certainly why both Windows and Mac are running OpenGL 2.1 - OpenGL 2.1 is all the hardware will support. On the other hand, based on your report it appears that NVIDIA has invested more effort in the performance…

> ...for people who give a high priority to 3d graphic performance, there is little reason to select an Apple product

As a software developer, I much prefer working in the OS X environment and living with this hardware on my desk. I can run Windows on my machine with little difficulty with full driver support for the graphics card, so there is little reason for me to select a non-Apple machine.

My specific complaint (whine?) is the difference in performance between Apple's OpenGL and Direct3D 9 on the exact same hardware. I am not qualified to argue more about the limits of particular hardware, drivers, or libraries. But I expect comparable performance between the two.

Didn't I start this by saying I don't blame Apple? Go figure.

Edit: I can confirm that under Windows my graphics card supports OpenGL 3.2. Under OS X, I only get support up to 2.1 (plus selected extensions). In this case, it is a software issue. It is believed that the next OS X release (Lion) will provide OpenGL 3+ support. I eagerly await its arrival.

Re: The Tale of OpenGL vs. Direct3D

#38

Post by [deleted] »

brudgers wrote: post #34
ANH wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't have games in mind, really. I am not developing one. I would suggest Apple could do a better job of keeping up to date with more recent OpenGL specifications. In fact, I am suggesting it.

The ability to support a particular OpenGL standard is dependent on the hardware (software implementation aside). It is not something that Apple can choose to implement on less capable hardware. That's almost certainly why both Windows and Mac are running OpenGL 2.1 - OpenGL 2.1 is all the hardware will support. On the other hand, based on your report it appears that NVIDIA has invested more effort in the performance…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN