OpenGL or DirectX ?

Ogtrax · Post by **Ogtrax** » Mon Oct 17, 2005 1:23 am

Its obvious that people who say that OpenGL is easier to program for is inexperienced. The only thing that makes people say that, is because they cant even make the framework. I program in both OpenGL and DirectX. DirectX is extremely easy to program for, it' is extremely stable, and it makes great results. I prefer DirectX by far over OpenGL. And DirectX is not limited to Windows, you can use DirectX for Xbox games, if you have the xbox xdk. As the Xbox is DX8.1 powered. So if you are familiar with DX8.1, you already know how to program for the Xbox. But, I also like OpenGL, since it is crossplatform, which is really great. So I use both. And some people think OpenGL is more stable than DirectX. Thats actually not true. I may sound like a M$ fanboy, but I am not. I'm stating facts, and I'm not stupid enough to let a corporation decide my opinions. Also, on the performance some of you have mentioned. nVidia has best performance with OpenGL, and ATi has best performance with DirectX. This has nothing to do with OpenGL or DirectX, but the drivers made by the ATi & nVidia

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Mon Oct 17, 2005 4:34 pm

Agreed. DX is good. In fact I learned a lot of D3D9 (then

in no time at all. It comes down to the user. Don't confuse greatness of one app or another with "lack of understanding".

OpenGl is cool too. I like both. DX on windows is good. Opengl is more hit or miss depending on drivers.

elander · Post by **elander** » Mon Oct 17, 2005 9:33 pm

It's obvious that one of these apis must be better than the other for different people. We can make a judgement of value for anything we want and this is valid imformation. If OpenGL is better for inexperienced people then its already an advantage towards DirectX as a learning and introductory api.

Millers Drillers · Post by **Millers Drillers** » Tue Oct 18, 2005 1:09 am

I think for the absolute beginner opengl is easier just because less amount of setup to get at least get something running if that makes any sense.

Sindwiller · Post by **Sindwiller** » Thu Oct 20, 2005 9:24 am

"MS wants to control your desktop"

Thats right, M$ want's to controle you Desktop, nooo... your whole life.

Windows is buggy... or you never worked with it?

I have worked with Mac OS 8, OS 9 and OS X, and i never had so much problem's like on Windows.

I had problems with HD space, with Viruses and Spyware who slowed down my Computer, Windows is sucking up my hardware, ive got crashes all over the time, libraries wont work....

This is crazy!

On Linux, i hadnt those problems... Linux does not use much of HD space, dont have Viruses (you dont need a Virusscanner), dont slow up my PC, dont crashes (but when it crashes, then i have worked something stupid in the config's), when there arent lib's installed who some prog need's, i can fast install it, Linux is'nt sucking up my Hardware and it Open Source.

I hope you will have mich fun with Vista, that whole DRM'ed bullshit of an m£!%*/*(łŋđg Companie who want's to rule the World!

wfg, Sindwiller

ThommyE · Post by **ThommyE** » Thu Oct 20, 2005 11:49 am

to come a little more back to topic: isn't viesta using dx 4 drwaing a 3d-desktop environment? -the nvidia page says somthing about geforceFX gards beeing viesta compatible.. well if everything below isn't-- if your os needs a high-end graka to work i can hardly imagine how much recources can be spared for games running on such a machine.
... 3d desktop. ok if you have the hardware, but i cant imagine !working! with something like this. althought it could be funny.. playing hide&seek with your browser in a window-forest, enjoying 360° bluescreen panaoramas in realtime etc...
well i guess bluescreens are gone since 2000,did they really need all the thime 3.11 -ME to realize that direct harwdware acces of a chrashing program is bat 4 the system stability?

well- i dont really care, happy without it=)

to com really back to topic, i just read a article about ATI. it seems they finally manage to improve theyr performance unter openGL dramatically. .. read something about 35% more performance.. ( just dont know if they compare it to the old ati performance or the performance of equivalent NV cards)

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Thu Oct 20, 2005 4:46 pm

I think in vista they want to use the speed of 3D hardware for transparancy and windows using quads etc.. not to go "full 3D" with the interface which would be a terrible and unusable idea.

It is just harnessing the power of the hardware to make for smoother/quick screens and fancy effects only possible (at speed) in hardware. Your desktop and folders are NOT going to end up looking like Unreal or Quake levels.

TrueLiar · Post by **TrueLiar** » Thu Nov 10, 2005 2:35 pm

My VGA card is nVidia. It do not support DX9. OGL'code seem more friendly then DX. But I think DX is better than OGL.

Ishtm · Post by **Ishtm** » Thu Nov 10, 2005 3:30 pm

I use IrrSR software Render for both mac and z80,
i don't see any better performance graphic ever,
but I think is a little faster on z80 than mac.

Cristian · Post by **Cristian** » Sun Nov 20, 2005 7:47 pm

How about using Software or HAL?

Or even better, GDI

.

Well actually it's cardwise and enginewise.

If you got nVidia + Irrlicht => OpenGL
If you got nVidia + Ogre3D => DirectX
If you got nVidia + CrystalSpace => DirectX

If you got ATI + Irrlicht => DirectX
If you got nVidia + Ogre3D => OpenGL
If you got nVidia + CrystalSpace => both.

JPulham · Post by **JPulham** » Sun Nov 20, 2005 9:00 pm

IMHO every thing should go to linux...windows should be destroied...but only after programmers are converted

, and that means all OpenGL...oh, and Bill gates should die...or at least suffer great misfortune

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Sun Nov 20, 2005 9:06 pm

When will this end....

afecelis · Post by **afecelis** » Sun Nov 20, 2005 11:41 pm

yes...plz!!!!!!

like the guys in Quake 2 screamed: "Make it stop!!"