Linked by fran on Sun 20th Mar 2011 20:02 UTC
AMD "AMD worldwide developer relations manager of graphics Richard Huddy has blamed Microsoft's DirectX and its APIs for limiting the potential of GPUs in PCs. 'We often have at least ten times as much horsepower as an Xbox 360 or a PS3 in a high-end graphics card, yet it's very clear that the games don't look ten times as good. To a significant extent, that's because... DirectX is getting in the way.'"
Thread beginning with comment 467068
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: dump
by WereCatf on Mon 21st Mar 2011 03:14 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: dump"
WereCatf
Member since:
2006-02-15

What planet do you come from?


From planet Earth, actually. Go ahead and research and ask around. One of the most prominent heads in 3D gaming technology, John Carmack, too used to defend OpenGL for years but has now himself admitted that DirectX has surpassed OpenGL.

Feel free to read if you don't believe me:
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/gaming/2011/03/11/carmack-directx-bett...

plus it works on WindowsXP (DX11 doesn't).


Irrelevant in this context.

Most games nowadays are also written for OpenGL ES, so little by little as portable devices get better, DirectX is becoming irrelevant.


Not even nearly "most games." Mobile games, yes, as there is only DirectX for Windows Mobile and WP7, but no console games nor PC games. Besides, that too is again irrelevant.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: dump
by Zenja on Mon 21st Mar 2011 06:40 in reply to "RE[3]: dump"
Zenja Member since:
2005-07-06

From planet Earth, actually. Go ahead and research and ask around. One of the most prominent heads in 3D gaming technology, John Carmack, too used to defend OpenGL for years but has now himself admitted that DirectX has surpassed OpenGL.

Feel free to read if you don't believe me:
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/gaming/2011/03/11/carmack-directx-bett...


The article you've linked to mixes up a family of API's (Direct X) with a 3D only API (OpenGL). The journalist should have mentioned Direct3D when comparing to OpenGL. Carmack would never make such a mistake, hence the article probably has more journalistic interpretation / freedom in it than actually quoting Carmacks exact words. The proof is still in the pudding, since Carmack is still using OpenGL for idTech5 rendering engine, and not Direct3D. There was a period in 2006-2008 where OpenGL got intangled in a dispute amongst it's members regarding the future direction of OpenGL. However, ever since they got their act together, OpenGL has been moving faster and adopting newer technologies more agressively than the Microsoft offering. There have been 3 more OpenGL spec releases in the last 18 months compared to Direct3D. Each spec matches hardware requirement (what's the point of doing a release if it doesn't target hardware support). Hence, OpenGL 4.1 supports more hardware features than Direct3D.

Disclaimer - I write 3D rendering engines professionally for a living.

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[4]: dump
by _txf_ on Mon 21st Mar 2011 10:34 in reply to "RE[3]: dump"
_txf_ Member since:
2008-03-17

Not even nearly "most games." Mobile games, yes, as there is only DirectX for Windows Mobile and WP7, but no console games nor PC games. Besides, that too is again irrelevant.


Actually, both the ps3 and the wii use Opengl ES

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[5]: dump
by WereCatf on Mon 21st Mar 2011 12:10 in reply to "RE[4]: dump"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

Actually, both the ps3 and the wii use Opengl ES


PS3 does _support_ OpenGL ES 1.0 with additions from 2.0 for smaller games, but all the bigger ones actually use libgcm, not OpenGL ES. Libgcm provides direct access to the RSX, OpenGL ES 1.0 simply ain't got nearly enough features to power modern games.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: dump
by merkoth on Mon 21st Mar 2011 15:39 in reply to "RE[4]: dump"
merkoth Member since:
2006-09-22

This is not true.

Most Sony consoles _support_ one form of OpenGL or another but that doesn't mean that developers really _use_ the API. The Wii graphics hardware is accessed through a proprietary API that doesn't resemble OpenGL that much.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: dump
by reduz on Mon 21st Mar 2011 20:40 in reply to "RE[3]: dump"
reduz Member since:
2006-02-25

The article you cite only confirms my point. OpenGL is *not* lagging behind badly. It's only now a few months behind the latest DirectX specification and ready to use when new hardware is released.
This is mileages better than when the ARB decided on each new specification, which would take years. Carmack's point is that vendors implment DX first, we know that, but also the reality is that since DX took the huge lead with DX9, the API takes almost a decade to incorporate new technologies. DX10 is pretty much a DX9 cleanup, and DX11 is tesselation + DX10+Compute cleanup.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: dump
by tomcat on Tue 22nd Mar 2011 00:23 in reply to "RE[4]: dump"
tomcat Member since:
2006-01-06

DX10 is pretty much a DX9 cleanup,


WTF. I have a hard time believing that you've ever written DX10 code, or you'd realize that the entire programming model is fundamentally different between DX9 and DX10. DX9 is largely fixed-function. DX10 is a constructive model that lets you build up chains of render/compute shaders. The models couldn't be more different.

Edited 2011-03-22 00:24 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2