Ogre Forums

Now I changed my mind after experimenting with Vista and both APIs, even under XP GL sucks in speed and quality...

Now the big question...how long D3D9 will be around before it becomes almost obsolete, like version 8...???

If we are starting a new project, shall we support D3D9 as well? or only and only version 10?

One take on version 10, it's implemented in shaders, and if the hardware does not support this shader feature the rendering falls back to software while the basic feature we want is already hardwired in the chip (fixed functionality).

This is honestly pretty funny. It's hard to take this seriously, but I recommend you switch to D3D10 when the Unreal Engine goes strictly D3D10.

And when is that?

2 weeks.




DX9 will be around as long as XP is around. Considering Vista was a flop, It's going to take a major migration to Windows 7 (whenever that comes out) to displace DX9 with DX10.

Frankly speaking what makes me believe that D3D quality is more reliable and I should consider a switch is Ogre demos.

Other demos that uses OpenGL looks great without any artifacts or performance hits. While in Ogre D3D runs with doulbe frame rate as that of OpenGL or even more, with OpenGL there are some distortions in rendering and I dunno what to say, but is it Ogre is D3D-oriented in a way that when switching to OpenGL it does not function properly...???

Here I ask myself, should I rely on Ogre demos? Or trust more decent demos on the net, or even games from Id?

We always blame ATI drivers and Windows support for OpenGL. Then how come all these 1st class applications running GL works like charm?

Just a thought

I also noticed some problems with OpenGL in Ogre3D. For example the instancing demo has some problems (seems to mess up the robot-meshes). Thats on a Nvidia GF8800 with Windows XP. So I also would like to know if OpenGL support in Ogre3D has problems or if it is the demo or something else that messes up the things.
In my eyes OpenGL is really important because its the only way you can go on non-windows systems.

I suspect the major focus of ogre is direct3d, since Sinbad does his development on windows.

I suspect the major focus of ogre is direct3d, since Sinbad does his development on windows.

I think I agree
The openGl demos run 2x slower than DirectX, which seems to be the case for many people from what I've seen, especialy with the fact i have an nvidia card.
Also I've found this comment in DevMaster : http://www.devmaster.net/engines/engine ... s.php?id=2

If you wanna use Ogre in Linux(OpenGL) - it's not that you looking for. Ogre architecture just incompatible with OpenGL pipeline.

For OpenGL pipeline your program must working like that

while(bRun)
{
clean_back_buffer

draw_all_geometry

do_all_cpu_works

swap_buffer
}

Ogre not working like that, so it slow and have CPU lags, becose have blocked for a long time in swap_buffer.


But for Windows(DirectX) Ogre is probable very good.

I don't know if this comment is revelant, but looking at the fps of the demo, i can buy that.
any ideas ?

yeah on my machine too.. opengl is slower than dx in ogre..

i have an ati radeon x1900 xt 512 mb video card

Actually with the latest drivers both seem to be running quite well , I don't see any difference in terms of performance - that's on 8800 GTX.

We always blame ATI drivers and Windows support for OpenGL. Then how come all these 1st class applications running GL works like charm?

Just a thought :idea:

If you take id:s games as an example I think both ATI and Nvidia has been vary wary to get those games to run well on their hardware since those games have been used to measure OpenGL performance on their cards.