Mantle/D3D12 are going to leave GL behind on performance

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by ttboy (293 posts) -

20 Things that drive me nuts about OpenGL

Source

My major motivation to posting this: the GL API needs a reboot because IMO Mantle/D3D12 are going to most likely eat it for lunch soon, so we should start talking and thinking about this stuff now.

Some bitter medicine/tough love: Most devs will take the easy path and port their PS4/Xbone rendering code to D3D12/Mantle. They will not bother to re-write their entire rendering pipeline to use super-aggressive batching, etc. like the GL community has been recently recommending to get perf up. GL will be treated like a second-class citizen and porting target until the API is modernized and greatly simplified.

#2 Edited by Gue1 (9767 posts) -

all I know about openGL is programming for an old ass extension called Glut. I know how to draw with vertices, add color, some simple shading, lighting, polygons and animate them but that's it. I don't understand anything of what's written on that article.

But saying that openGL will be treated like second class citizen is just plain idiocy. Because openGL works everywhere while DX only works on Windows, and thanks to Windows 8 they are actually losing market.

#3 Edited by AutoPilotOn (8407 posts) -

Glide ftw!!

#4 Posted by jhonMalcovich (4629 posts) -

As Mantle is Linux-compatible, I don't see any problem in this.

#5 Posted by scottpsfan14 (4719 posts) -

And you think Open GL won't do the same as these? Nvidia already have great Open GL extensions that increase the draw calls 10 fold. And has better low level access just like DX12 and Mantle. Truth is, Open GL 5 will be the same. Why wouldn't it?

#6 Posted by Wasdie (49747 posts) -

He actually doesn't talk about performance in that. He's talking about how poorly managed OpenGL is and how difficult it is to implement OpenGL. It's just too complex and outdated to be used by your average graphics programmer for anything big.

They keep adding algorithms to it. Almost all of Direct3D's features come from OpenGL, but are wrapped in a much more manageable package. The performance differences between the two are there but they are almost all negligible because there is always a way around the various bottlenecks. However devs are much more likely to optimize for DX as it's far easier to actually use the software.

#7 Posted by CrownKingArthur (4650 posts) -
#8 Edited by pyro1245 (756 posts) -

He makes a few good points but the fact remains: OpenGL is more powerful and cross-platform. Okay okay, Microsoft has been working really hard on DX and DX11 is almost at the level of OpenGL; I'm sure DX12 will be another improvement. The tables turned back on '05 or '06 when MS basically launched a smear campaign against OpenGL and left the review board. Most importantly: OpenGL is an open standard, not for profit; with the goal of letting any user on any platform experience high-end 3d graphics. OpenGL is good for developers, it's good your your video card, it's good for you. I wish we weren't all mindless sheep that just believe DX is better because MS says so. I'll stick by you OpenGL! The best part about OpenGL is that anyone has the ability to propose changes to the review board. All it would take is more people using OpenGL and providing feedback to clean up the API.

#9 Edited by osan0 (12693 posts) -

@Wasdie said:

He actually doesn't talk about performance in that. He's talking about how poorly managed OpenGL is and how difficult it is to implement OpenGL. It's just too complex and outdated to be used by your average graphics programmer for anything big.

They keep adding algorithms to it. Almost all of Direct3D's features come from OpenGL, but are wrapped in a much more manageable package. The performance differences between the two are there but they are almost all negligible because there is always a way around the various bottlenecks. However devs are much more likely to optimize for DX as it's far easier to actually use the software.

I always heard the opposite was true. DX has a very vertical learning curve and is stricter on how things should be done. in contrast openGL is not as bad in the area...but it can lead to bad habbits. a developer was talking about being able to get a prototype up faster using openGL compared to Dx.

it was in an article years ago in fairness which was about cross platform development between the PC, 360, wii and PS3 so maybe things have switched around since then.

most complaints i hear about on the openGL front are, as you mention, driver implementation (basically nvidia are the best of a bad bunch).

le source

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTY4ODk

hopefully, with more devs using openGL (for mac and linux support) we will see this side of things improve. hell its an open standard....if openGL itself is so bad then maybe someone will fork it as an openGLGE (gaming edition) and clean it all up or something.

#10 Posted by Kuromino (1307 posts) -

Please ensure you read the System Wars survival guide.

You must have at least 500 posts before you are allowed to create topics in System Wars.