- #OPENGL VS DIRECTX 11 PERFORMANCE DRIVERS#
- #OPENGL VS DIRECTX 11 PERFORMANCE DRIVER#
- #OPENGL VS DIRECTX 11 PERFORMANCE FULL#
- #OPENGL VS DIRECTX 11 PERFORMANCE WINDOWS 8#
- #OPENGL VS DIRECTX 11 PERFORMANCE WINDOWS#
This is not a full blown graphic settings test, but rather a render and in-game effects test with option flags upon starting the game client. What kind of edge you ask? Welp, we took this generation and last generation mainstream graphics cards and ran several tests to conclude what render mode performs the best. We wanted to do something that would not only be helpful to regular players, but would give aspiring competitors a performance edge. Very soon, it might be standard to develop a game that works well across every platform - rather than focusing on Direct3D and leaving Linux and OS X out in the cold.With the International 2017 championship over, we had some time and thoughts of Dota 2 running through our heads.
#OPENGL VS DIRECTX 11 PERFORMANCE WINDOWS#
If the Windows gaming crown continues to slip, OpenGL might soon become the default API, rather than an afterthought.
#OPENGL VS DIRECTX 11 PERFORMANCE WINDOWS 8#
With Gabe Newell’s distaste for Windows 8 (and Blizzard echoing his sentiments), the imminent release of Steam on Linux, and the continued growth of smartphone games, we could be on the cusp of an OpenGL revolution. It obviously in Microsoft’s best interests to ensure that the best gaming experiences are exclusive to its platforms. There are solid OpenGL implementations for Mac, Linux, PlayStation 3, Nintendo Wii, and just about every modern smartphone (OpenGL ES).
Microsoft has good reason to hamper the progress of OpenGL, of course: While DirectX is proprietary and only runs on Windows, Xbox and Windows Phone, OpenGL is completely cross-platform. Microsoft has relentlessly marketed DirectX, too - and who can forget the release of Windows Vista and Microsoft’s OpenGL smear campaign? Vista’s bundled version of OpenGL was completely crippled, forcing many devs to switch to DirectX. This is a vicious loop that again leads to more DX devs, more DX games, and better DX drivers/tools/documentation.
#OPENGL VS DIRECTX 11 PERFORMANCE DRIVER#
More developers using DirectX = more DirectX games = better driver support. DirectX, because it has a cleaner API and better documentation, is easier to learn. Really, it all comes down to that crummy old thing we call the network effect - and, of course, monopolistic heft and marketing dollars. It isn’t because of hardware support: All Nvidia and AMD graphics cards support the latest version of OpenGL along with DirectX. If OpenGL is faster, why is DirectX still the predominant API? It isn’t because of image quality or features: OpenGL 4.0 has all of shaders and tessellators and widgets that DX has. That 0.4 millisecond difference is down to how fast the DirectX pipeline can process and draw 3D data. At 303.4 fps, OpenGL is rendering a frame every 3.29 milliseconds at 270.6 fps, DirectX is rendering a frame in 3.69 milliseconds. In short: OpenGL is faster than DirectX.Īs for why OpenGL is faster than DirectX/Direct3D, the simple answer is that OpenGL seems to have a smoother, more efficient pipeline. With the same hardware, Windows 7/OpenGL/L4D2 clocks in at 303.4 fps - compared to Windows 7/DirectX/L4D2 at 270.6 fps. In this case, Valve says that the Nvidia Linux driver lacked multithreading support - and once they added it to a later version of the driver, performance increased.īut here’s the best bit: Using these new OpenGL optimizations, the OpenGL version of L4D2 on Windows is now faster than the DirectX version. Valve is carrying this relationship over to Linux, which is very important for the continued growth of Linux as a gaming platform. This last point is interesting: Valve has long-standing relationships with AMD, Nvidia, and Intel, where Valve reports driver bugs and the GPU maker fixes them in a timely fashion.
#OPENGL VS DIRECTX 11 PERFORMANCE DRIVERS#
To realize such a huge performance gain, a three-pronged approach is taken: The game is tweaked to play nicely with the Linux kernel, the game is optimized to work with OpenGL (rather than DirectX), and bugs in the Linux graphics drivers are addressed. The Linux port of L4D2 didn’t start off at 315 fps, of course - the initial version actually maxed out at just 6 fps. Valve attributes the speed-up to the “underlying efficiency of the kernel and OpenGL.” These figures are remarkable, considering Valve has been refining the Source engine’s performance under Windows for almost 10 years, while the Valve Linux team has only been working on the Linux port of Source for a few months.
0 kommentar(er)
