OpenGL 3 & DirectX 11: The War Is Over

[Guest]

You also forget that game development is not the only arena OpenGL is used in. Commercial game development could stop now, and the entire scientific and academic communities will continue to use OpenGL. Its not just about games, despite how much gamers like to think they are the only ones that matter.

 

[Tindytim]

Really disappointing.

Why didn't they go with the profiles immediately? I mean, that's been one of the biggest issues with OpenGL, it actively caters to multiple markets. You would think they would have foreseen a problem like this and split the development.

[citation][nom]tomc100[/nom]If MS was smart they should release the xbox3 that is fully dx11 compliant several years before Windows 7 is released.[/citation]

Windows 7 isn't that far off. Maybe even as early as June of next year (which would make a lot of sense)
http://www.fashionfunky.com/2008/09/microsoft_gives_up_on_vista_wi.php

[citation][nom]tomc100[/nom]As far as I know, dx11 features is not possible on the open platforms like the PS3 or 4 so multiplatform games will always look and run better (provided that dx11 does what it says it will do) on the xbox3 thus annihilating the console market.[/citation]
That's if OpenGL doesn't get it's game together, or if those consoles don't use better API's (the PS3 uses a Modified version of OpenGL). If OpenGL will run on the Next Xbox, then why would spend huge amounts of time and money porting to DX11, when they could get the product out earlier.

 

[dagger]

[citation][nom]anonymous12311[/nom]You also forget that game development is not the only arena OpenGL is used in. Commercial game development could stop now, and the entire scientific and academic communities will continue to use OpenGL. Its not just about games, despite how much gamers like to think they are the only ones that matter.[/citation]

Compared to gaming, revenues for everything else combined is tiny. It's capitalism, when the $ sign comes in, gaming is nearly all that matters.

 

[Guest]

i wish micro$oft can release linux version of directX ...


*GOAL ... cheasel scored !

 

[Houndsteeth]

dagger, do you have figures to back your statement? I'm just considering the higher profit margins that AMD and NVidia enjoy just from selling their pro line of cards. Sure, they entail a higher level of support and have a much more rigorous level of quality, but when the profit margin on the hardware alone is more than 10x that of a consumer level card of the same caliber, I can see that it wouldn't take very many cards to make it a much more lucrative market to focus on.

Demand for 3D PC games has plateaued, while console games are still a growing market. And there is only one console that uses D3D (Xbox), and that's only because it's made by Microsoft. Sony and Nintendo are both using either variants of OpenGL or their own proprietary 3D format.

 

[Guest]

The ultimate problem is that Microsoft, instead of working *with* OpenGL, chose to instead to create the cake from scratch. So it's taken them a decade, and in the meantime OpenGL (a MUCH easier API to use) has foundered. I don't feel any sympathy for either cause.

I hope the Ars Technica article is correct, and that specialized APIs are on their way out.

 

[mbmcavoy]

I may be a Mac fan, but I do agree that high-end 3D graphics is one area where Windows does beat OS X hands down, and where Mac hardware offerings fall flat. (I'm keeping my Windows box for games.)

A lot of people have said that Apple just doesn't care about games. I'm not so sure that's the case. Since Macs use OpenGL exclusively, they simply can't compete with DirectX in this arena. By not offering modern graphics cards, they avoid upsetting customers who expect a DirectX gaming experience, and the front-page press of being worse on the same GPU hardware.

Basically, this is a major weakness of the Mac, but they don't control that aspect - so they are focusing on the many strengths that they can control.

Makes me wonder, though. Apple has been proactive in the development of OpenCL for GPGPU processing, which is also controlled by Khronos. I believe that Apple has a killer consuper-level app using OpenCL up their sleeves, to be revealed with Snow Leapoard (OS X 10.6). While this might be able to get a boost even out of today's mild Mac hardware, it could be a trigger for real GPUs in future Macs.

I can't imagine Apple would care so much if they just wanted in on the small "desktop supercomputer for scientific weenies" market. OpenCL will also work on Windows and Linux, especially with Apple's limited GPU offerings - that would be giving charity to their already dominant competitors in that market! Apple almost has to have an exclusive, consumer-interest application.

Or, perhaps Apple is just building a good working relationship with Khronos, so they can assert more influence over OpenGL in the future?

Or building experience with modern GPUs so that they can introduce their own alternative to OpenGL and DirectX?

Time will tell.

 

[Heyyou27]

In the age of tools like CUDA and fully programmable GPUs, graphics APIs will continue to be less relevant. Tech5 from id software is using OpenGL, which is looking to become as popular as Unreal3. Of course, Epic has stated that they're already pretty far into the development of Unreal4, so the winner may end up being whoever is first to market, but unfortunately for Epic, it looks like id will probably get there first.

 

[DcMan1]

For those that think, that Nvidia and ATI, are going to miss a chance
of feeding the incentive, that new directx 11 hardware, is not necessary, your all crazy!!!.

 

[eodeo]

That sounds nice and all, but I really don't think it's going to happen considering DirectX is Windows Only, which means they'd have to stop supporting Macintosh and Linux entirely. In financial terms, considering there are many PC/Mac-based studios (mine for example) you'd cut out a major portion of your revenue by only supporting one API that's incompatible with two other primary platforms.

In case you haven’t noticed, Mac is incompatible with most relevant software today. Lacking DX support is minor compared to the other shortcomings- like 64bit support to name one of the bigger.

Other platforms need to realize that without D3D support they’re losing the biggest war world of computers has faced since its creation- the world of 3d. OpenGL needs to pick up the slack fast, or some 3d API needs to enter this battle; else, the windows will become even bigger monopoly- if you’re forced to chose between crawling/outdated graphics or MS for d3d support.

Alias WaveFront was only reason Maya had a Mac version and even they saw how OGL is getting obsolete and went on and invested heavily in D3D. This direction isn’t going to change now that AutoDesk owns it. For Mac(and any other OS) to be considered a serious professional platform 2 things have to happen:
1) real 64 bit support
2) support for API that isn’t from the stone age and slow while being ugly

for the moment Mac has neither and as such is the worst platform for any digital creation work- not to mention that lacking d3d and being Unix based only makes it incompatible with 95% of games while the rest run slowly due to OGL (and lack of hardware support for the new graphic cards – mac has 2 generations old mid range card noted as the best one it supports..)

We can easily agree that D3D as monopoly standard is a very very bad thing- just look what openGL did in height of its power- it created obsolete(at creation!) and overpriced quadro/firegl line that had/has no real world advantages over their gaming equivalent cards, save for the opengl that isn’t purposely crippled in its drivers.

For digital content creators D3D has been a knight in shining armor. It delivering better interactivity at supreme visual quality and fraction of the original cost required for the “professional” cards. The tide can turn with blink of the eye and D3D could become the monster it set out to slain.

Without unified opposition MS has already won.

 

[exiled scotsman]

Um, eodeo, OS X has had support for 64bit for awhile now, same with linux. It has only been in the last two years or so that the need for 64 bits of addressable space has finally started to become a necessity. What does UNIX have anything do with game support? I'm sorry, but I'll take a Unix based OS over Vista/Win32 any day.

D3D will NEVER be open source--maybe as a last gasp before it dies (if it dies).
Things definitely appear bleak for OpenGL in the gaming arena. However, things will get interesting when Larrabee is released. When that happens, it will become a three way battle. OpenGL vs D3D vs Software (x86).

 

[Alternator]

[citation][nom]anonymous12311[/nom]You also forget that game development is not the only arena OpenGL is used in. Commercial game development could stop now, and the entire scientific and academic communities will continue to use OpenGL. Its not just about games, despite how much gamers like to think they are the only ones that matter.[/citation]

True, OpenGL isn't just used in the gaming arena, yet games have been driving the technology for a longtime, not these other applications!

The new features that are introduced into OGL are coming from a gaming background... MS, Nvidia, ATI etc come up with nifty new techniques in DX, which are then trickled into OGL via extensions and maybe made properly part of it half a decade later...

The concern I think people have comes down to this being the current scenerio:
- You Develop in DX to be competitive on the Windows platform
- You then blow money porting to the inferior OGL to get up and running on the other platforms.
- Some CAD players however don't want to rewrite to make use of the new features and can wait, so would rather OGL merely get extended rather than cleaned up... This attitude is efficient to a degree, but it also holds technology in this arena back...

Thats my take on it anyway (based on what I've read in this article and others).

 

[Guest]

First all the entire PC platform has lost the gaming war, sorry but games on consoles out sell PC games something like 10 to 1. Nintendo the biggest game seller doesn't use DirectX, and Sony uses OpenGl ES. Xbox 360 is the only one. Most games support both engines because they need to run on a variety of platforms.

I was disappointed with 3.0 OpenGL, but I think the author lacks an understanding of OpenGL extension. I believe even now you can't do geometry shaders in Windows XP unless you use OpenGL, and most laptops today lack graphics cards that can use the features found in DX10 which are the majority of the shrinking PC gaming market

 

[harrycat88]

Doesn't Quake 4 use openGL?

 

[eodeo]

Um, eodeo, OS X has had support for 64bit for awhile now, same with linux.

Um, exiled scotsman(love the name btw), no OS X has nothing like linux. Mac OS has half baked virtual support of 64bit addressing space that NO application existing today can use. Feel free to find a single application to prove me wrong, but be aware that Maya isn’t it and neither is final cut pro; or any other program that one would consider professional- or any other program for that matter.

What does UNIX have anything do with game support?

Exactly- nothing – you cant play anything there. Mac is not that different from Unix- its basically a user friendly beautification of Unix.

I'm sorry, but I'll take a Unix based OS over Vista/Win32 any day.

If you run servers- you should, but If you play games of any kind and sort, or do ANY real work, you probably should pick one of the d3d supporting OSes... Sadly that means picking one Windows over the other….

D3D will NEVER be open source

I agree, but i don’t see it dying before MS does. OpenGL needs to be REAL open source and not in Khronos/Apple/RandomNameHere possession. As it is, its biggest downfall is that it looks like open source, but its nothing like open- nor is it “true” closed like DX and it doesn’t get funding/advancements that DX gets either. Its just getting worse by the month- and it has been heading nowhere for the last 7 years now. 7 years in tech industry is utter obsoleteness. 3D API is no exception.

a three way battle. OpenGL vs D3D vs Software (x86).

That’s no contest either. Dedicated 3d api will pwn software based implementation like crazy- same reason you have 1teraflop GPU and 60gigaflop CPU. Labaree will have to come out today and be 20x faster than the c2quadx 9770 – not likely even in a years time when scheduled for the actual release.

Once out, it too will depend on both dedicated 3d APIs to be competitive in 3d display segment. Software only day might be coming, but it wont happen for at least 2 more years.

True, OpenGL isn't just used in the gaming arena, yet games have been driving the technology for a longtime, not these other applications!

The sooner the suits in Khronos/Apple/RandomNameHere realize this, the better 3d world will get.

Thats my take on it anyway (based on what I've read in this article and others)

Exactly the impression i got too- they’re backward and they know it, and that doesn’t bother them- since it doesn’t bother their backward users- enough for them to switch to a modern program.

First all the entire PC platform has lost the gaming war, sorry but games on consoles out sell PC games something like 10 to 1.

True, but this has nothing to do with the API war.

Sony uses OpenGl ES.

I think i read in this very article that both HD consoles use d3d- and that would make so much more sense- have you seen ps3 games? They look good- no way OGL is driving that.

Doesn't Quake 4 use openGL?

It does.

 

[thr3ddy]

I cannot understand why the topic of "OpenGL should be Open Sourced" keeps coming up.. It's a specification, not an implementation of anything.

And even if NVIDIA or ATI/AMD would release their source code, do you really think you know how to handle it? Interfacing with proprietary hardware is quite a bit different than your standard x86. Without these APIs, development times would be extremely long and horrible. Just imagine coding Quake 4 entirely in ASM, multiply the source's length by the amount of different flavors and opcodes needed for different chipsets and manufacturers. In other words, the abstraction is absolutely necessary and regular programmers needn't worry about the low-level driver implementation.

As for the CAD disaster, I don't care anymore. They can stick a glVertex3f, glColor3f and the rest of the FFP where the sun don't shine.

 

[jv_acabal]

Pardon my 3D illiteracy. I once thought OpenGL is superior to DirectX. Well, my point of comparison is way way long ago when the early HalfLife Counterstrike showed better graphics with OpenGL than with Direct3D. Now I'm updated. Hahaha. Great article! Thanks for waking me up!

 

[DXRick]

"The war is over"? As long as there are other platforms (like Mac, Linix, and consoles) the war will not be over. It is a shame that so much effort at updating OpenGL has resulted in so little improvements.

Microsoft spent a lot of moola in the creation of DX10, including the creation of the DX API and working with graphics cards makers to standardize the features and requirements of the video cards.

Why can't they just exploit this effort to update OpenGL to the same standards and features, instead of trying to reinvent the wheel?

 

[Guest]

DX is also cross-platform because of Wine. That's how several "Mac ports" are being made, by wrapping the Windows version inside of a Wine/Cider, and some games are officially supporting "Wine" so that they can support both Mac and Linux.

 

[Guest]

DX 10 was a failure because it was tide to Vista - which was a failure. Read Valve's statistics of PC users: more than 80% use XP. More than 10% of new PC sales are Macs anyway. And to rub salt into the wound if you buy a PC game if you have Vista you need to have a higher spec PC just to run it. Rip off city.

 

[eodeo]

In other words, the abstraction is absolutely necessary and regular programmers needn't worry about the low-level driver implementation.

I wont pretend to understand enough to say otherwise, but the “software only” method suggested by Tim Sweeney, seems a bit like scifi to me. Its not that I think its impossible, or unlikely, but at the moment it does seam far fetched. It might looked like glide/ogl/d3d were temp solutions to the default software renderer in ‘99, but from today’s pov, its just… unrealistic to say the least.

As for the CAD disaster, I don't care anymore. They can stick a glVertex3f, glColor3f and the rest of the FFP where the sun don't shine.

Exactly.

"The war is over"? As long as there are other platforms (like Mac, Linix, and consoles) the war will not be over.

Actually the war is over. It has been for quite some time now. The latest OGL 3.0 just confirms it – once again. Non d3d platforms lost the 3d war. They need a miracle now and this “resurrection” might bring the war back online, but at this moment its highly doubtful.

Why can't they just exploit this effort to update OpenGL to the same standards and features, instead of trying to reinvent the wheel?

Why help competition make the wheel rounder when you can do it yourself and make yourself necessary for the new cars to work right. Everyone will be getting your car for a smoother ride. Apple would do the same if OGL was theirs. I’m betting that they’re eating their hats for not trying to push proprietary 3d acceleration of their own.

If they did and MS had OGL and Mac had d3d, I just might find an excuse to pay 2x more for the same hardware just so I could work and play 3d the “proper” way. As it is, Mac is just a poor excuse for an OS.

DX is also cross-platform because of Wine. That's how several "Mac ports" are being made, by wrapping the Windows version inside of a Wine/Cider, and some games are officially supporting "Wine" so that they can support both Mac and Linux.

That sounds very cool. I imagine ubutnu is benefiting from this as well, right? Seeing how it’s a flavor of linux.

And to rub salt into the wound if you buy a PC game if you have Vista you need to have a higher spec PC just to run it. Rip off city.

True. At least you can run it on Vista– unlike on Mac, that is a synonym for incompatible while costing you 2x more for the same spec hardware. Nice.

 

[Guest]

ok so after the dx10-vista fiasco a new horizon is starting to rise..and they think we gonna bite?.....cmon pc gaming sucks right now cuz MS want to force us to buy their faulty 360...as for ogl3 it is harder to make it work since a lot of companies want to rule the standard by themself ...their greedy are their achilles ...and the users pay for their mediocre products.

 

[Guest]

So with the way the economy is getting worse and worse you think new computers and new video cards and a new version of directx is going to be fashionable? I think not... With PC games being taken out of retail stores and internet becoming the only method of purchase coupled with the fact that pc hardware is just more expensive than console; old hardware and innovative games along with consoles are going to be the in thing.

Do you really need a better looking game? There isn't much to change other than making games run better on existing hardware, innovative new idea games, or moving to a whole new method of play such as virtual reality (who could afford that!).

Eventually; games, like movies, will be criticized for special effects and about how they have no real content.

 

[Guest]

I have this question for a long time: How about a OpenGL Fork?

 

[thr3ddy]

[citation][nom]NeoLuxembourg[/nom]I have this question for a long time: How about a OpenGL Fork? [/citation]
Listen, OpenGL isn't open sourced so how would you fork it?

The OpenGL specification defines how the OpenGL machine works, the independent hardware vendors implement the specification through their drivers.

Unless you work at Intel, AMD, NVIDIA or any other hardware manufacturer, you won't be able to fork it since you have no idea how to program the hardware.

As to the (interesting) discussion above, I too believe that hardware innovation will be slower than it has been in the last ten years. But I don't think that old consoles will be the dominating platforms. Consoles are commodity items that have a fixed hardware path. When gamers once again notice the benefits of a PC's upgradability, not even to mention the current PC's hardware superiority, PCs will be the only logical choice.

Until the crash, save money.