To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
lucas_maximus,
I appreciate the response. But I was hoping for actual benchmarks, not just a theoretical hypothesis.
I know they added more features in DX10 & 11, which if used will help offload the CPU, but a comparison between the SAME features of OpenGL and DirectX wouldn't necessarily be affected by that. An apples to apples comparison between DX10 and OpenGL could still produce OpenGL as a winner. No solid evidence has been produced either way.
It's unlikely to affect in game playability to any noticeable degree, it's mostly about bragging rights.
But saying Linux is faster because of kernel and driver improvements when they compared code written against an API that is 8 years old to the latest API code is not a fair comparison.
Especially when the newest API has specific improvements that may invalidate the FPS difference.
Oh please, it's a known fact that Direct-X 11 is faster than 9.
Just download World of Warcraft trial and try for yourself....
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/world-of-warcraft-cataclysm-dir...
With nVidia cards it's 30% increased performance, lol.
Poor Valve with their out dated engine.
Edited 2012-08-03 18:36 UTC





Member since:
2009-08-18
Read the link, it explains why.
It about pre-emptive multi-tasking is better in Windows Vista and 7 with the new Direct X versions than Windows XP and Direct X 9.0.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Direct3D#Direct3D_and_Window...
Also it states
* Multithreaded rendering — to render to the same Direct3D device object from different threads for multi core CPUs
* which exposes the shader pipeline for non-graphical tasks such as stream processing and physics acceleration, similar in spirit to what OpenCL, Nvidia CUDA, ATI Stream achieves, and HLSL Shader Model 5 among others.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Direct3D#Direct3D_11
* New state object to enable (mostly) the CPU to change states efficiently.
* Predicated Rendering allows drawing calls to be ignored based on some other conditions. This enables rapid occlusion culling, which prevents objects from being rendered if it is not visible or too far to be visible.
* Instancing 2.0 support, allowing multiple instances of similar meshes, such as armies, or grass or trees, to be rendered in a single draw call, reducing the processing time needed for multiple similar objects to that of a single one.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Direct3D#Direct3D_10
Considering the Framerates were soo high (almost 300 FPS), the process was most likely CPU limited not GPU limited. (This is true also of Quake 3 which is now as much of a CPU benchmark than anything else, Quake 3 engine unless running at silly resolutions can't really use more than 64mb of video ram).
Since a lot of these improvements appear to take load from the CPU, I would argue that it would be different if it was the same game using Direct X 11 vs OpenGL.
Edited 2012-08-02 19:31 UTC