Is Direct3D suppose to be THIS slower than OpenGL?

[Wasper]

Hi ,I am not sure where to post this.. I might be having a serious problem in which none of my games that uses Direct3D would perform well on my computer. Before I explain my problem here are my computer's specs:

AMD Althlon XP 2000+
Geforce3 Ti 500
512 DDR Ram
Nforce Asus Ultra Mainboard
Windows XP Pro

I have all the latest drivers for every single components in my computer. I am up to date with Direct X 8.1

Here's my problem.. Any games using Direct3D at no matter what video settings will run at low frame rate. My frame rate when playing any Direct3D games will just be extremely unstable. I usually use 1024X786 resolution. I get an average of 20 - 40 frames per second or lower on ANY games using Direct3D. And I would usually get a lot of slow downs in the frame rate. I get slow downs when like I am looking at sceneries that has a lot of stuff. I especially get slow downs during a lot of action in the game such as shooting , explosion ect. My frame rate would usually drop to around 5 - 15 fps when there is a lot of shooting in ANY games using Direct3D. While games using Open GL like Quake3 would maintain a high frame rate of about 150 fps at highest settings, even when there's a lot of things and action going on in the game.

I play games like Deus Ex, Giants : Citizens Kabuto, Operation Flashpoint, or Morrowind. Now my question is , is this normal? Is anyone else experiencing this "problem"? Are Direct3D games suppose to be THIS slow , that the games are almost unplayable? If so why is it that most games uses Direct3D?
Please help me out here... Thank you.

 

[10GHZ]

my experience is similar, although i never compared fps in both rendering mode, but yes, direct 3D is slower and most other plp would agree that open GL will give u better image quality and higher framerate.
about your slow down direct 3d, which games in particular? i know that operation flashpoint is pretty high demand on hardware, my xp1.6 radeon 8500 can only do about 45 on 1024x768x32
but you should have no problem running games like dues ex and quake 3 in direct 3d.

 

[eden]

I recall Deus Ex had a patch for Direct 3d performance. I don't know from where to get it, but I hear it was in the new patch.
However also to me, OpenGL is faster and better, I feel it more flexible. But there have been many awesome D3D games too.

--
Intel and AMD sitting under a tree, P-R-O-C-E-S-S-I-N-G!

 

[MadMechwarrior]

If you get 5-15fps in morrowind dont be surprised... I have a 1800+ with a ti4400@ti4600 speeds and I still get like 20fps in cities... I've heard that that game didnt have any view culling so it would render everything behind first then go to the front even if you didnt see what was behind... I think its tru because looking at a bare wall I still get like 16-20fps... Its one of Morrowinds engine limitations... they might come out with a patch. As for the others I really have no idea, I dont own em...

 

[eden]

Imagine using Aniso 64-tap in Morrowind, on GF3s!!!

I was suspecting Morrowind might have some view rendering problem. I think it evens renders the inside of the buildings too!
Seriously though, the textures are not THAT much advanced, just Pixel Shading makes a lot of things nice though. I feel the game's polygons, areas are somewhat too static or too rough. I mean you can't hit a wall, you jump and hear the same bump sound, it feels like nothing is soft...

--
Intel and AMD sitting under a tree, P-R-O-C-E-S-S-I-N-G!

 

[Wasper]

Ok, lemme get this straight OpenGL has better graphics and faster frame rate than Direct3D.... but then why is it that most games uses Direct3D? Are they purposely making games so slow that you can't play them?

I understand that Morrowind is slower than other games. But it shouldn't be THIS slow! I only get around 5 - 15 fps in cities. And when there is a lot of fighting outdoors my frame rate tends to drop to around 5 - 8. In doors my frame rate can only get as high as 10 - 40, and will get major drops I start fighting. It's just plain absurd!
I understand that Operation Flashpoint requires quite a lot of hardware to run the game , but when I am playing the game is barely playable! It is like being back to my old 333MHZ computer and playing around 5 fps with every single game.

For Deus Ex the game will tend to give me major slow downs when there is a lot of shooting. It seems as if my computer cannot handle action when using Direct3D. But yet at the same time I turn all the settings up to the highest possible in games like Quake 3 and Half-Life , and the game still runs perfectly with no slow downs even when there is a lot of action going on. Heck, I get 10X the frame rate more when there is action in OpenGL games than when there is no action at all in Direct3D games.

 

[eden]

Like I said, Deus Ex in WinXP has performance problems. I had to cope with it in the end...

But as for Morrowind, I would suggest lowering draw distance and shadow numbers.

Try swapping motherboards, flashing BIOS, use old video drivers, set AGP aperture, there are many things. The two affecting things in the end will either be the card OR the mobo, so once you round it up, you'll know which is slowing down for some reason.

--
Intel and AMD sitting under a tree, P-R-O-C-E-S-S-I-N-G!

 

[cakecake]

This isn't a direct3d problem.

I remember an article I read about this a few years back. Game devs were talking about what they liked and didn't like about the two API's. In general OpenGL and D3D are mostly the same speed, save for a few things. OpenGL, unofficially, however, does tend to get slightly higher framerates. But the main difference between OpenGL and D3D is that OpenGL is open source (it has a board that meets and discusses changes) whereas D3D is a monopoly by Microsoft. You'll often hear game developers lament about how they're "waiting for the next directx patch" so they can continue programming their game. On the other hand, D3D has a ton of documentation and support from Microsoft, more than OpenGL.

This little cathode light of mine, I'm gonna let it shine!