• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Nvidia Talks OpenGL – Offering Massive CPU Performance Boost Via Modern OpenGL

Its happening.

Hardware and software is getting nervous of where they see windows/dx/wintel headed.

They're building a foundation should the switch need to be accelrated
 
Sony also alluded to their wrapper APIs for the PS4 being similar to existing PC APIs, so I'd assume that they were referring to OpenGL there. If you want to target a range of platforms then it's the best choice, hopefully the tools and support will catch up now that it's becoming so widely used.
 
Wouldnt be possible for Nvidia to make similar command and code in nvapi?

Sounds really easy, then all they would need to do would be a main gpu supplier of a multi million selling console so developers are using your software by default to make it a no brainer to use it.

Easy
 
Sony also alluded to their wrapper APIs for the PS4 being similar to existing PC APIs, so I'd assume that they were referring to OpenGL there. If you want to target a range of platforms then it's the best choice, hopefully the tools and support will catch up now that it's becoming so widely used.
Yeah, tools are great and much needed, but what really makes me positive about OpenGL's future is that it's the only choice on mobile/tablets.
 
how weird, seems like nvidia are putting their support behind an open API standard and proprietary frame sync technology, while AMD are putting support behind a proprietary API standard and open frame sync technology

LOL. Thanks for putting things in perspective.

Just like the initial Freesync announcement there is going to be a lot of details Nvidia is leaving out. OpenGL may have a command that reduces draw calls like Mantle but that by itself isn't the only reason Mantle has devs excited.
 
Are you serious? :lol
So why developer aren't using OpenGL on PC anymore? Extremely hard and complicated to use and/or this performance boost is only for best-best-best case scenarios?

I don't want to say "Microsoft moneyhatting everyone!" but... I guess DirectX resonates with people more than OpenGL.

This was indeed because microsoft moneyhatted everyone in the wake of those standards.

Now developers are too much used to DirectX to switch easily to OpenGL
 
I don't think Valve will encourage devs with compensations, financial incentives. They might have a lot of money, but Sony, MS they are not.

They probably aren't going to outright give them money, but they could lower the royalty rates on games using their API.
 
They probably aren't going to outright give them money, but they could lower the royalty rates on games using their API.

Exactly. Lower their cut from 30% to 25% on all game sales that have a SteamOS version for a certain period. Or say that the first $X of sales after the release of a SteamOS version have no Valve cut.
 
Sounds really easy, then all they would need to do would be a main gpu supplier of a multi million selling console so developers are using your software by default to make it a no brainer to use it.

Easy

Have You heard about Physx? Nope? Check how many games supported it.
 
Not quite, specially if your game uses SM 5.0 features. At the very best you still need more extensive testing with different GPUs and driver versions, moreso if you want to run on Intel GPUs.

Another problem is that Windows doesn't ship with up-to-date OpenGL support, while the out-of-the-box DirectX often does the job.

Minor problems, though when you can save a huge amount of time by not supporting two graphics apis.
I know several developers from college that use OpenGL on Windows without a hitch.
 
Pretty sure it's DirectX

Usually on Windows you can run applications that use OpenGL, given that like DirectX those libraries operate directly on the GPU

The difference is that in fact while DirectX works only on Windows (and consoles the last gen), OpenGL is available for every platform.
 
Durante said:
I really wish I could say that it's just because developers are stupid and lazy, because I'd love for everything to be based on an open rendering standard, but sadly that is not the case.
Between Valve, Mobile and Web - OpenGL will likely be shoved down everyone's throat before long. I still feel it's the more obtuse of the two choices, but it's winning out with sheer inertia.

Then again the proliferation of rendering middleware on all cost-levels is making API wars less relevant each day.
 
Not exxactly... Open GL kinda sucked really hard for a long time.

Well, it's also true that DX sucked far more at first (everyone who was a PC gamer back then probably remembers Carmack's rant about it) but MS forced it into popularity with a massive amount of moneyhatting.
 
Well, it's also true that DX sucked far more at first (everyone who was a PC gamer back then probably remembers Carmack's rant about it) but MS forced it into popularity with a massive amount of moneyhatting.
What about those us who had to code on it? Hint: dx prior to 7, even 8, was the abomination from hell.
 
Between Valve, Mobile and Web - OpenGL will likely be shoved down everyone's throat before long. I still feel it's the more obtuse of the two choices, but it's winning out with sheer inertia.
I actually agree that it may be slightly more obtuse -- though it's much better now (if you ignore deprecated features) than it was, and even better in ES which has less legacy cruft -- but it's also a lot more flexible due to the extension mechanism.

And honestly, this is one case where I'd be fine with the less technically sound option "winning". The graphics API is too important a thing to be proprietary, particularly for anyone interested in the long-term preservation aspect of this hobby.

What about those us who had to code on it? Hint: dx prior to 7, even 8, was the abomination from hell.
8 wasn't that bad in my opinion, but yeah, prior to that...
 
Usually on Windows you can run applications that use OpenGL, given that like DirectX those libraries operate directly on the GPU

The difference is that in fact while DirectX works only on Windows (and consoles the last gen), OpenGL is available for every platform.

This is all kinds of untrue. OpenGL and DirectX require a GPU driver. OpenGL and OpenGL ES are not supported under Windows Phone 8, which is what the poster you replied to was referring to.
 
Do you think it is enough though? Are decent tools a big enough incentive for a big developer to move away from DirectX or increase its workload without some form of compensation?

There's a bunch of games on Steam that have OSX ports but no Linux ports, because they are often ported using a 3rd party middleware for porting DirectX games to OSX.

The name escapes me, but it plugs directly into the DirectX API and other Win32 APIs, so most of the source code works as-is without the need to rewrite the game to OpenGL. I'm certain many of those games would never get an OSX port if such option didn't exist.

Minor problems, though when you can save a huge amount of time by not supporting two graphics apis.
I know several developers from college that use OpenGL on Windows without a hitch.

I'm not talking about "using". I'm talking about broad distribution. If your game is niche and hardcore, you're safe because your audience most likely updates their video drivers regularly and are more likely to have proper OpenGL support. If you're targeting casuals and kids, then you need to do your utmost to make sure your game runs out-of-the box in as many situations as possible, and in Windows it means using vanilla DirectX 9.
 
Top Bottom