Why Open GL and Not DirectX should be the API of Choice for AAA Games

[d_brennen]

I still want to hear about Unix being buggy and unstable

 

[GoogalyMoogaly]

OK, it was just a simple question. I've not really followed a lot of the stuff Matt described so I was just asking. Matt made it sound like Nvidia pretty much own Pcper while AMD are just good friends with Anandtech. So I was just asking, as to be fair Matt doesn't seem to be the biggest Nvidia fan, so may not be the most unbiased poster on the forums, if this was known/admitted/proven or speculation.

 

[LtMatt]

I don't blame Nvidia for it Google. If Nvidia chucked money at me and gave me dozens of gpu's id doing anything they wanted me to.

 

[humbug]

oh yes.... you did indeed.


So 'if' and its a big if that is the case does this mean that Microsoft wrote it, or did they farm it out to a third party.


edit: sorry taking this thread off topic.

Someone points out that Mantle looks like what Microsoft are using in the xBox One, so it must be Microsoft.

If Microsoft wrote it i doubt they would let AMD use it on the PC (Their competitors in a gaming sense)
AMD said 'we' have been developing it for the past 2 years, its far more likely that what Microsoft are using 'is' Mantle. One coin two sides and some common-sense.

But thats not really the point, who created it, owns it and all that is not relevant. AMD have it and they are letting Game devs use it for PC games, happy days.
You can bet your life Microsoft wouldn't if they had any say in it.

 

[drunkenmaster]

Valve ported Source (and with it LFD2, Half Life 2, etc.) to OpenGL + Linux and got big improvements in speed. It was about +15% without any driver optimisation at all.

The next thing they say is openGL with more fps is doing frames faster... well from the quote maybe I'm missing it, same game same OS different renderer, who knows. openGL and DX will perform differently in different games, same as most OS's and most hardware. There will almost certainly be games where openGL has a lower framerate and a higher frametime... the average frametime is completely useless in talking about how smooth something is.

As for openGL, it should have been pushed more and it's entirely down to MS pushing DX for donkeys years. There was a time though that DX got REALLY pushed while openGL dropped back in features at which point dev's went with the "newer" features and API and never really had a reason to switch back as both gpu makers prioritised DX driver support also.

Fact is most engines already do support multiple API's and adding more adds more work... but that isn't an issue, that is part of making an engine. For DICE to make an engine that is compatible with more computers, more platforms and more gamers..... they are increasing the amount of places they can release a game, what will support it, all for minimal cost.

You spend 2 years coming up with an engine, the next decade tweaking it and updating it, the 3 months to add brilliant support for a new API which enables all those games they and everyone who licences their engines to more platforms and more customers... it's a no brainer.


SteamOS most people are presuming(almost certainly correctly) will be all games supporting openGL, with multiple/most crossplatform games having an openGL rendering path already, the only thing to add is a little platform specific testing. More cost, yes, potentially reaching more customers... price/profit argument and clearly the idea is winning.

Ultimately MS is about rehashing code and doing things messily and cheaply, they have been for years. The ridiculous install size of Windows vs any other OS is... insane. It's bloated, buggy, security hole ridden mess and every dev has basically agreed for donkeys years that DX isn't anywhere near where it should be.

If every game dev today dropped dx, didn't do a second more work on it and only went with openGL, most games would work(or be made to work pretty easily) on most platforms, windows included.

In terms of Mantle and the xbox, in almost all likelyhood it is on Xbox, it's likely on PS4 and it's almost certainly AMD software that they've let MS use, not the other way around.

Otherwise we're talking about MS writing an API then allowing AMD when asked to release it on PC's which would help push the market away from DX and the windows lock in. The chance of MS doing that is essentially nil, I'll be shocked if that's what happened. With the similarity of console/amd hardware, it would be basically a waste for anyone but AMD to have written it then given it to MS/Sony to add their own individual tweaks to it to take advantage of their particular hardware.


One huge advantage to Mantle is currently it's designed for gaming, it's from a gpu maker and being targetted via game dev's requirements. DX is controlled by MS, but they get input, and openGL is controlled by a ridiculously large group of people who get to have their say. DX has an advantage in the one voice one direction, quicker changes(if MS were quick and were sensible that is). openGL changes need to be approved by a huge number of companies and people, extensions don't get full support, it's not really set up to be a gaming only standard which I think limits how fast it can move.

openGL is to me almost too widely supported/used/targeted, too many people involved. Mantle has the advantage of being new, ground up, efficient(most likely, I'm guessing here) heavily targeted at current gen equipment to help leverage that power better, with a very limited scope of gaming, with only one real voice to say yes/no to changes, it can move quickly, adapt and they are really only interested in what game dev's need/want and they can push both hardware and the API towards the same goal very quickly.

 

[ubersonic]

A good read and I for one hope to see OpenGL used more by devs in the future. Is DX finished?

The OpenGL vs Direct3D* battle went down in the late 90's and D3D won, both ATi/Nvidia supported both, both ran fine on Windows, but the deciding factor was that D3D was updated more frequently and was a LOT easier for developers to use, there isn't really much more to it than that.

If the battle happens again, the result will be the same as the two deciding factors are still the same.

*DirectX is not an actual API, it's the name of the API family to which Direct3D, Directdraw, Directsound, etc all belong.

 

[Freddie1980]

There's a lot said about Mantle with very little information to go on. We only really know that it's an API, it offers some lower level functionality than OpenGL or DirectX, and it is supported by AMD on GCN.

If AMD's written a low level hardware API for GCN specifically, that's great for the consoles, but not much good for PCs, as it'd only be usable while AMD sticks with that architecture. It'd mean messy wrapper layers later on, which would destroy any performance benefits on future hardware.

If it's a more generic low level API, there'd be no reason that nvidia couldn't implement it too (providing it's not a closed API), and it'd be competing with OpenGL as a cross platform API.

AMD traditionally keep the same architecture for multiple generations so the usefulness of mantle will be around for a good 4-5 years yet.

 

[GoogalyMoogaly]

openGL is to me almost too widely supported/used/targeted, too many people involved. Mantle has the advantage of being new, ground up, efficient(most likely, I'm guessing here) heavily targeted at current gen equipment to help leverage that power better, with a very limited scope of gaming, with only one real voice to say yes/no to changes, it can move quickly, adapt and they are really only interested in what game dev's need/want and they can push both hardware and the API towards the same goal very quickly.

The downside to Mantle being that it works on the GCN architecture, meaning it doesn't support Intel, Nvidia or older AMD graphics cards. That's quite a large chunk of potential customers to exclude before you even consider who would actually want to buy the game.
For this reason I can only see Mantle being an extra API added not a replacement for DirectX. I suspect this is the reason that despite all the nut-hugging DICE are doing with AMD at the minute they're releasing Mantle support as an extra at a later date rather than only supporting Mantle and using it from the start.

 

[Rilot]

An excellent topic.
In my opinion Open GL is bound to make a huge comeback due to the previously mentioned support within unity. Mobile gaming is the biggest growth area in gaming by miles and is mostly based on Open GL.

Also LOL @ UNIX being buggy and unstable. That will be why every major bank on the planet uses Oracle on UNIX for their back end systems. Banks love buggy and unstable platforms :roll:

 

[humbug]

An excellent topic.
In my opinion Open GL is bound to make a huge comeback due to the previously mentioned support within unity. Mobile gaming is the biggest growth area in gaming by miles and is mostly based on Open GL.

Also LOL @ UNIX being buggy and unstable. That will be why every major bank on the planet uses Oracle on UNIX for their back end systems. Banks love buggy and unstable platforms :roll:

Agreed, server and corporate implementation versions of Unix are very good indeed, this forum is running on a Unix based server.
You don't play games on those, i'm talking about public user implementations like Ubuntu.

 

[flopper]

The downside to Mantle being that it works on the GCN architecture, meaning it doesn't support Intel, Nvidia or older AMD graphics cards. That's quite a large chunk of potential customers to exclude before you even consider who would actually want to buy the game.
For this reason I can only see Mantle being an extra API added not a replacement for DirectX. I suspect this is the reason that despite all the nut-hugging DICE are doing with AMD at the minute they're releasing Mantle support as an extra at a later date rather than only supporting Mantle and using it from the start.

will work with dx still.
Mantle offers a choice to you.
either upgrade the old amd card or Nvidia card and enjoy Mantle with Bf4 and other games supported or game with dx.

the great thing here is, if the Mantle allows you a better enjoyment with a game and less overhead we dont need to buy new cpu hardware that cost a fortune anymore.
I consider an amd 8350 due to Bf4 is the main game I play and if Mantle offers me a good balance boost, I can get the amd cpu and motherboard and save 500+ euro vs a Intel 4930k system.

I think people forget that when debating Mantle, the cpu IPC etc..goes away as an advantage and multicore wins.

 

[GoogalyMoogaly]

will work with dx still.
Mantle offers a choice to you.
either upgrade the old amd card or Nvidia card and enjoy Mantle with Bf4 and other games supported or game with dx.

the great thing here is, if the Mantle allows you a better enjoyment with a game and less overhead we dont need to buy new cpu hardware that cost a fortune anymore.
I consider an amd 8350 due to Bf4 is the main game I play and if Mantle offers me a good balance boost, I can get the amd cpu and motherboard and save 500+ euro vs a Intel 4930k system.

I think people forget that when debating Mantle, the cpu IPC etc..goes away as an advantage and multicore wins.

Yeah, but that means Mantle doesn't replace DirectX, it's an optional API that has to be coded along side it. OpenGL could replace DirectX.

Mantle currently has quite a small target audience, since I believe only the 7700-7900 series graphics cards actually use GCN. So Mantle is of no use to Nvidia users, Intel users (unlikely to do much gaming I'd have thought?) and AMD users using 6900 series cards and below. Also 7600 series and below don't use GCN, so any 'new' cards that are re-badged 7600 series (and below) wont use it.
Despite the impression this forum gives I'd imagine that 7700-7900 users make up a pretty small chunk of the PC gaming sector. Steam Hardware survey shows now GCN graphics cards in the top 10 most popular graphics chipsets and only 1 in the top 20.
How many cards in the top 20 could run OpenGL?

 

[Rroff]

EDIT: Seen information elsewhere that contradicts what I was posting about.