Added: 2 years ago
From: KINIAO
Views: 55,840
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (304)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • crysis looks better

  • it is fake . 40 fps visialition 20 fps)

  • Wait, the Windows side says 40-50 frames a second yet it looks worse than 20 frames a second. I call BS.

  • Like 313hummer said, unfair test. I saw this same demo with the OpenGL version running slower, this is just the exact opposite, framerate wise. OpenGL still has the clarity benefit.

  • OpenGL shows lower quality in flying shots, but it shows considerable performance vs. directx in the close-ups. There is also no glitching, like in directx when going down the pier. I think opengl is better. I'd rather have performance in my games rather than fancy stuff.

  • DirectX Is Faster Than OpenGL, Face It Linux Users!

  • 1) What version of OpenGL?

    2) Show the frames per second.

    3) Machine Specs?

    4) You are an idiot. 1 Operating System running OpenGL vs a fucking API that's optimized to the shit for windows is just plain stupid.

    OpenGL runs on many platforms, d3d does not. Don't compare them, just fucking use one.

  • i agree fps is fast on linux but windows has havy detail and depth linux in preety blur

  • @AndyHarglesis

    BS, nothing else to say.

  • I have my own libraries that eat DirectX and OpenGL for breakfast. Just search on Google for "Andy Harglesis LIB." It's not for download yet, but soon will be. A good demonstration would be checking out some videos of the games I have created using Assembly. Thanks!

    -Andy Harglesis

  • Um one major problem, you need to state what drivers you are using and 2, you need to state what version of opengl it is, no one can take you seriously if you have neither.2nd you have to post which stress test you are using so that way people can tell if it is optimized for opengl, and not some program running in wine. Because if it is running in wine it is bound to have performance issues.

  • The directx video lags a lot more than opengl

  • @cpd12589 if those two computers were both windows then the opengl would be lagging alot more horribly than the directx. microsoft does this in order to promote their graphics library, directx.

  • how did you get the linux version to work

    i cant get the WINDOWED one to work << it loads halfway then exits

    and fullscreen wont do shit like it goes full screen and its just black w/ a mouse

  • Both of them look choppy like sh** to me!

  • windows have a bit lag

  • are these the same konfigurations? cause i think windows is much more lag.

  • Direct X keeps both gamers and developers at the mercy of MS and thats exactly how MS wants it. They make a piece of shit O.S. (as we all know) and restrict the lasted graphic developments. If everyone used OpenGL we would all have access to the newest shit as it comes out and not have to buy a new OS from MS ever few years. Furthermore, you wouldn't have to buy RIDICULOUS video cards to run the newest games. MS has a close relationship w/ HW developers so they make DX bloated.

  • doest opengl render faster than directx? and requires less gpu power?

  • bu-bu-bu- bullshit

  • better FPS in linux

  • The problem with this whole thing is that your all relying on the devs at Unigine to be both OpenGL and DirectX gurus. It's likely that they are more adapt to one than the other and just ported the engine to the other API.

  • This is bunk... Look at the FPS in the windows side, compare the number to the apparent fps being displayed. I call shenanigans!

  • no surprise really. ubuntu is a much lighter os than windows.

  • for all of u noobs, opengl was always been faster than direct x in 3d view, u could run a 3d game faster than directx with a weak pc loosing noothing or very low quality, i remember old windows 3d opengl games like quake etc.....

    Mhh i need ubuntu.

  • i use linux.. and i still say this isnt a fair test...you have to show FPS on linux ..restart your pc...boot into windows..then show you have the same specs..and run the same test again..i hate these videos

  • @313hummer

    I am an avid Linux user as well... I have two computers that are dedicated to the operating system while the other 5 are Windows machines ranging from XP professional 64 bit to Windows 7 64 bit machines... I have to say that I spend most of my time at my Ubuntu machines.. I love programming and Linux is superior... But yeah I hate these videos too.. This test is by far unfair...

  • @313hummer This is an unfair test because he's running on different operating systems. Sure, it's proving that linux is "viable" for gaming. But that's not necesarily what people are interested in. I for one, want to see opengl vs direct x on windows 7 exclusively, to see which runs better, and looks better... althought I think they both look pretty much the same(opengl a bit sharper... possibly a bad thing some times).

  • GTS 250?! Did you mean GTS 440?!

  • Derp DirectX

  • I saw the FPS monitor in the top-right corner, then I lol'd.

  • Unigine Tropics is a DX10.1 benchmark, not DX11. Plus the GTS 250 doesn't even support DX10.1, it only supports DX10 and below.

  • @R4Zy3L yea this was probably rendered using software mode which is why it was so slow

  • Funny that you say it's a GTS 250. Windows 7 supports DirectX 11, but the GTS 250 does not. Therefore, either the Windows version is running in pure software mode (unlikely) or it's running DirectX 11 using the DirectX 10 feature level, which disables all hardware-dependent features of DirectX 11 not available in DirectX 10, such as tessellation and compute shaders.

  • blog.wolfire (DOT) com/2010/01/Why-you-should-use­-OpenGL-and-not-DirectX

    good article about how microsoft is once again trying to destroy good things (open gl) for money

  • Not exactly the same and WTF is that? DirectX11 is not supported for that card, only a part of the code. Also try to use the same AA filter.

  • 4.1 was announced in 2010.

    This video was made in 2009.

  • I don't think this video is too accurate since I've seen a lot better performance of DX11 before. However, OpenGL seems to be available on all platforms and that's one thing I like better about it.

  • :\ why does FPS counter shows so high count for that slideshow on the right side?

  • open GL could do a lot better than in this sample!

  • so ubunto is linux but isnt linux bought out by apple

  • @TheMaazster Sorry, but linux was never bought out by apple. Ubuntu isn't linux. From what I know, only the kernel of Ubuntu is Linux. Hence it is called the Linux Kernel. It's somewhat complicated since the ubuntu developers integrated many open source projects into their os, such as the GUI. Basically, summing everything up that I've said, Ubuntu is another Distribution Of Linux. Btw, Linux isn't a company; it's an Open Sourced Operating System. Hope this helped :)

  • @Hoobes1 thank you

  • @Hoobes1 Well to correct you a little Bit. no OS out there is Called Linux. Linux is just an open source Kernel. that's all it is. Ubuntu is based on Debian which is a Linux based Distribution. But Debian is Debian. Ubuntu is Ubuntu, and so on. Linux is only a Kernel. :-) Linux is not an Operating system. it never was. Just one Really Great free open Source Kernel that when combined With many other API's it Becomes the brain of the Operating system but not the OS itself. :-)

  • @TheMaazster 3 operating systems out there (ones that we care about), windows, mac, and linux. they are independent of each other, so apple doesnt own linux first off. linux has many variations, as it is open source, meaning its code is freely available to developers. it is essentially modded by developers to create unique o.s's, one being ubuntu, another knoppix and so on.

  • @TheMaazster MAC OS X is a paid linux distribution, apple did mac os based on linux kernel, otherwise, ubuntu is a free distribution of linux, u can have a free cd from them site :) . Everytime thye release 1 new version of ubuntu i request the cd. :)

  • @Pokez0rd Apple is based on BSD, not on Linux

  • Comment removed

  • @Darkteammadfiz You didn't replied the good one...

  • @Darkteammadfiz Actually its based on Next and Mach. they didn't add BSD code until Leopard shipped.

  • Respond to this video... openGL vs. Direct3d really depends on your GPU. some GPU's handle openGL really great but suck on suck on Direct3D. and same for DX as Well. OpenGL is a long standing API graphics standard since 1992. It has More then enough Potential to Be way better then DIrect3D. But it really comes down to your GPU how Well it can handle each API.

  • @Pokez0rd no they didn't. they based it on Next which sits on top of Mach. They added BSD code but not until Leopard shipped. Before Leopard it was all Mach. and BSD is Unix not Linux. the Kernel is very Linux Like. But its Mostly Mach and Unix BSD code. Linux is a monolithic Kernel. Mach is a Micro kernel, and the BSD code it shares is adjacent to the kernel not part of it directly. You should do a little More research before you Make claims like that. Linux is Much More simplistic.

  • OPEN GL WING

  • This isn't realistic, try actually playing the same game on linux vrs windows. Direct X out performs it 9 times out of 10.

  • Ohh Perfect!!!, Lets go to play Assasins Creed, RE5, Dirt 3 or ahother Game in Linux... Ohhh... i don't think so.... xD

    Or What is the idea???

  • Color is better on Directx. I actually perfer the slightly sharper textures on the OpenGL as apose to AA on directx. I am shure others agree.

  • @squirrleydew the textures arnet based on it its DX or open GL..

  • ok to sum it up. its the right tools for the right job. any programmer will tell you the same. advantage of directx is that it supports sound aswell as other things. opengl is purely visual. advantage of opengl is the platform distribution. If its in opengl, it runs anywhere (within reason), if its in dx, your program is a slave to windows. Each has its ups and downs. These fan wars are usually fought for no logical reason.

    1 more thing ubuntu drivers are no where near as developed as windows

  • if this is what opengl than why do all the games of 1990's and so thta use opengl

    have such "bad" graphics??!!

  • @roxasfruit ehm because in 90 there wasn't the graphics cards we have today?

  • OpenGL can do this?

    This movie cheared me up!!!

  • which is more object oriented opengl or directx???

  • @kidMallok neither. Their purely functions. libraries that let other languages draw stuff on screen. However most games are written in c++ for its speed. C++ is an oo language. Your best bet would be to focus on the oo side of c++ and implement dx or opengl in your functions. eg class shape would use a draw function from the libraries. get me?

  • Ubuntu does look good, and it's free. Not saying DirectX sucks, though. However the uploader is lacking knowledge lol

  • ubuntu win!)

  • As I can see, DX looks to have a bit more detailed graphics, but lags as hell too...

  • directx better?

  • @capatais777 my ass

  • @xXxDiukexXx DIRECTX 11 IS BETTER

  • @Enakro well.. this time i ran opengl test on ubuntu 10.10 (64bit)  to see if windows is "holding back". but performance is almost the same. same settings & hardware as above FPS: 21.3 Scores: 538 Min FPS: 6.8 Max FPS: 41.0 results : opengl performance is similar between win 7 and ubuntu 10.10 directx11 (win 7) was 2x faster than opengl (on both win 7 and ubuntu 10.10) gpu driver version : 260.19.06 (ubuntu) and 266.58 (windows 7)
  • check your driver ( launchpad. net/~ubuntu-x-swat/+archive/x-­updates):

    - GeForce GTX 470: 719 (OpenGL 4.0)

    - GeForce GTX 470: 768 (Direct3D 11)

    geeks3d. com/20100527/test-opengl-4-0-a­nd-direct3d-11-tessellation-gt­x-480-vs-gtx-470-vs-hd-5870-vs­-hd-5770/

  • Comment removed

  • DirectX and OpenGL are both not good enough for my games.

    I made my own self-made graphics library from scratch and enjoy using it better than DirectX and OpenGL because they don't give me the graphics capabilities of Square Enix's work.

  • @AndyHarglesis What is Square Enix

  • @timpster93 A video game development/distribution company with billions of dollars revenue and a big title under its name - Final Fantasy.

  • @AndyHarglesis Cool! Did you post a video?

  • Comment removed

  • Does your library? o.0

    If so, have you released it?

    Also, don't forget Just Cause 2 :)

  • @AndyHarglesis Video or cool story bro.

  • @SOF006 Fuck you.

  • @AndyHarglesis lrn2shaders

  • @MrOMGWTFxCorp Write a coherent message and I'll acknowledge it.

  • opengl is definitively smoother, but the graphics are about the same. Hmmm?

  • sorry but, but in the ubuntu, is it a Mesa Driver or is it a closed source vendor driver ?

  • I select OpenGL because that's perfomer than DirectX

  • the win7 machine is always rendering at +25fps, still the video is lagged. sometimes it reaches 60fps and the video looks like 15.

    What the hell? Doesnt people realize this is bullshit?

  • @xnaGames This is a recording of something lagging, think about it.

  • merci pour cet excellent test.

  • lol, poor gts 250!

    while windows does run OpenGL its much laggier. if i start WoW on my little notebook, it runs with about 5 FPS with DirectX. In OpenGL mode i get 1-2 FPS

  • @samrijijkot I see, thank you for enlightening me. I retract my previous comment.

  • @samrijijkot it's because blizzard put allot more effort into the directx engine in wow rather than openGL.

  • @genma986 Yep, pretty much sums up this nonsense

  • i never see sutch open gl... and " Windows runs OpenGL as well"

    -windows 7 doesn't run open gl for me... i can't play cs 1.6, Runr: halls of vallhala and old unreal's. they won't run with open gl and rune its very laggy with direct x :(

  • So where does Ubuntu come into this? Windows runs OpenGL as well, so why didn't you compare APIs on the same OS to get a realistic comparison? That's pretty retarded, if you ask me.

  • @bp56789 I don't think he meant that. I think this video was to demonstrate that OpenGL isn't crappy compared to DirectX + that Linux can in fact generate graphics just as good as Windows. Its just that not many developers have released games for Linux because Microsoft offers a discount on tools and rights management if you sign away your right release for other operating systems. Just another Microsoft monopolistic strategy.

  • too bad it's not about the breakthrough nor the art, not for microsoft, they just launched some propaganda campaign exaggerating & overrating directx, and then limiting directx compatibility to windows so that gamers are compelled to upgrade to newer windows versions, more wallets for bill gates, & then theres the windows viruses, malwares, and spywares in partnership with windows antiviruses, very clever, who couldnt say Mr. Gates owned the virtual world economy?

  • @dragonbukid OMG!! its a CONSPIRACY!!! lol

  • OpenGL is way older than DirectX and better from the programming aspects - OpenGL is a standard, DirectX is not. OpenGL runs on nearly all platforms, DirectX works only on Windows. You won't find DirectX in any serious graphic applications besides games - but thats DirectX is made for: Games. OpenGL was primarily made for 3D Applications, Visualizing etc. and it is still the best choice in graphics stuff. - at least in my opinion as a programmer.

  • Why you should use OpenGL and not DirectX

    look at

    blog.wolfire.com/2010/01/Why-y­ou-should-use-OpenGL-and-not-D­irectX

  • @hujson77 it is many that use opengl but they have learn DX3D. and its very hard so they dont want to change becouse thay have trained for DX3D

  • with linux to have to switch off "compiz" in case you have for example ubunti (it slows down the framerates in difference to the more clever windows7 aero which even keeps in window mode the performance) ...

    the rest is like always:

    1. directx is faster than opengl

    2. ATIs opengl implementation is slower than NVidias one (everyone in SecondLife (= opengl) know that, ati has a very bad reputation there - similar to many other games/3d-communities which have opengl) ...

  • Here here...I'm an ATi user and SL resident...

  • IM SURPRISED! OpenGL is WAY better looking than DirectX 10!

  • @ItsTheChief117

    opengl was always better but the money is in X :D... haha they get paid a cut for developing games for direct x however open gl offeres much better manipulation than direct x but hey its free -.- no 1 makes money!

  • @sale666 openGL was better in the past, but dx jumpped ahead with 10. openGL missed a step with 3 so a bunch of people jumped ship. it is back up with 4, but i wouldnt say that it was "always better".

    i like the idea of openGL better, it is a hardware abstraction layer. but dx10 and 11 beat openGL 2 and 3 in terms of eye-candy features. well... tbh, tessellation was the only one i really cared about.

  • Sorry but I just benched this with my gtx 470 with latest drivers (to run latest OGL) and ran it against DX11, and DX11 did better.... Oh I used Heaven to do it also.

  • I call shenanigans on this video. I agree with ryonagana 100%

  • no frame skip on linux

  • This is as the title says an OpenGL+Ubuntu 9.04 vs DirectX+Windows7 comparison. It would have been interesting to see OpenGL vs DirectX while both running on the same OS(Windows, since DirectX is Windows only)... and also see a comparison of OpenGL between Ubuntu and Windows... the last comparison being filmed by a camcorder so that the differences in screen-capture software doesn't factor in.

  • theres a bit difference

    opengl when render that trees u can see DX11 is using AA, openGL dont

    for an accurate test u have to use same configurations of both..

    just a "propaganda" linux vs windows

  • @ryonagana Looks the same to me. I don't see how you see any such thing on that blurry video. You're seeing what you want.

  • @ryonagana not only that, it's also on dx10, everyone knows it runs like complete shit compared to dx11

  • @ryonagana - Your point is irrelevant. As you can see from the above post, the GTS250 only supports up to DX10.1. This video sucks.

  • @ryonagana the trees and landscape do look clearer on the oGL side. That is an indication AA is turned on. There are problems with this comparison though. He should have put it in benchmark mode an posted the results as well as the side by side. That gives average, min and max fps as well as an actual score. It also lists all the graphics settings in the results so we could verify it was a fair test which it probably wasn't.

  • Microsoft, incidentally, which is not always touch them fuck

  • Ubuntu !!!!!!!!!!

  • DirectX11 on a GTS 250? Lol, no. Impossible.. It doesn't support directx 11.

  • @FRURMELLL It does. I have it... and it does...

  • @FRURMELLL I did the same test look at my nextgenos wordpress it show the FPS score diffrence.

  • @FRURMELLL GTS 250 is not optimized for DX11, but it will run everything.

  • @FRURMELLL True, but it also doesn't support oGL 4.1 so on that front i'd still call it a fair test in that way but like I pointed out before we also need to know the settings for both. And the reason I call it fair is because most games don't use oGL 4.1 or dx 11.

  • Directx have problems with the FPS

  • @Themoviewatcher96 What do you mean by that? I haven't mentioned anything about any GPU here as far as I remember so I really can't figure out by saying that dx11 (piece of software) isn't gtx250 (piece of hardware). :-/

  • Just too bad that most developers kind of ignore OpenGL. I mean, they are all hyped about hardware tesselation in DirectX 11 while OpenGL already supported that long before DirectX did...

  • I will now always run my games with opengl. DX11 requires a supercomputer

  • well here we go. OpenGL: faster, prettier, supports all platforms, FREE!

    DirectX: slower, uglier, only works in Windows, keyword here: Not free. INCLUDED in LICENSE of WINDOWS!!!! (and Xbox [originally DirectXbox] and Dreamcast)

  • @EricTheHax I got all my DX10 stuff for free 0.O

  • @LeetGamer4L DirectX only comes with the Windows license and only usable in Windows. Not free. You pay for it when buying Windows. If you didn't pay for Windows, then someone gave it to you OR v=Jbq_1Wy70rE

  • @EricTheHax How about Wine? :P

  • @drs99wingzero Ask Microsoft that. They'll tell you about all the Microsoft-approved wineries :P

    ahh nothing like Bing jokes in the morning

  • @LeetGamer4L Well, yes and no. DX is free as in "free speech". But since it can be used on Windows only (foget about Wine for a moment for it isn't supported at all by M$). And Windows is far from free (both meanings of this word). I think you agree with that. ;)

  • @EricTheHax ... Just because its free it doesn't make it better nor faster or prettier :P

  • @drs99wingzero No, but being faster and prettier does. Face it, your defense of d3d is useless.

    Free just gives it a bonus, and supports all platforms makes it uber 1337.

    Fact: only one non-Windows platform (XBox is ppc Windows, tailored to the system) uses DirectX. That would be the Dreamcast.

  • @EricTheHax And Windows Mobile :), hold on... by definition DX is also free :) so your bonus just got distributed. Either way they are both good API's, and they both have advantages and weaknesses.

    btw, A contradiction would be, if you buy SLES and make a OpenGL game, its like Buying windows and programming in DirectX :P ....

  • The end result? Also there a very few details in this comparison to make this legit...

  • @hujson77 cause of money.somebody pays them to use they`r software 

  • @randomchevap If only that were true. No, many game developers use DX for several reasons, including the ease-of-use of the SDK and better driver support on Windows platforms (which dominate the PC gaming market). Of course, many use OpenGL as well. It's very silly to say that DirectX is only in use because Microsoft gives handouts to those who use it. Which, of course, isn't true in the first place.

  • OpenGL definitely rocks!!!

  • WTF LINUX LOOKS BETTER AND SMOOTHER? WTF!

  • @Iamthelaw1526 You need to stop. You don't know what you're talking about; your ignorance is only polluting the discussion.

    DX has the same 2D rendering capabilities of GL and can be made to render a GUI just as easily.

    "It runs not only for games but on the desktop"

    Are you serious? OpenGL and DirectX are graphics APIs. All they do is talk to the graphics card. Neither is a game engine.

    You shouldn't argue things when you've no idea what you're talking about. It's bad form.

  • Surprised that so many "experts" here did not ask the obvious. KINIAO: did you turn off ALL background options (defrag, index, clean cache memory, clear RAM, defrag all files, start & measure with a fresh boot, put the software on comparible-speed partitions on the hard disk, etc) ???

    Also, assume you had CPU power at its highest function. So many unknnown variables. The whole "test" is invalid, unless the truth be written clearly.

    Greg Zeng, Retired (medical) IT Consultant,

  • @grey0powerlessnesss This is why Windows Sux!!!

  • @grey0powerlessnesss That's what I was thinking! Also a fresh OS install would make the comparison more legit. This video is certainly invalid. 

  • directx

  • Such awesome performance from OpenGL

  • If all the work that this world put in marketing was used in development and research we were 100 years far now. DirectX, Windows , Microsoft it's all about marketing...

  • @vely213 That's how the world works. Yes, in some ways it's sad, but in many ways, it's necessary. Demand drives good products, good products drive sales, sales drive more marketing...etc.

    If there's one thing that most experienced 3D programmers will admit about DirectX, it's that the API is tight. It's coherent, and clean,largely because of its closed-source nature.

    Personally, if I could have the clean, intuitive interfaces of DirectX and the portability of OpenGL, I think I'd be in heaven.

  • Since both APIs can do the same things at the end, we can only blame people behind OpenGL that made their API so hard/tedious to use (ex. extensions... :x).

  • Comment removed

  • Bullshit. If you look at right top corner you can see FPS counter for Directx 11 version. Somehow you made it look laggy like it was 5 fps. You can't even see the difference between 25fps and 50fps from this video. Nice try, but seriously... FAIL.

  • Great comparison video, but to say that either API is better based off of a test like this is entirely moot. There are far too many other factors influencing framerate.

    To say "OpenGL is better" or "DirectX is better" simply reveals the ignorance of the one saying it. One who has actually programmed in both will understand that each API has advantages that make it unique, and that the smart thing to do is create an abstraction layer and use each where convenient.

  • God, another way Ubuntu/Linux bends Windows over.

  • Is this rendered or real time filmed with a gamecam of some sort? directx says it gets 47 fps yes looks choppy? if it was game cam then the extra burden of directx maybe why.

  • Are you sure you did this alright?

  • hah they go back and forth of speed .. GL fast, DX not and vice versa...

    note Capturing sucks framerates :P

  • wow... same system specs, same engine, same game, and 2 different 3d graphics rendering system. This just proves that opengl can be more capable... >.>

  • Comment removed

  • My observation here is that you have a bad case of fragmentation on the Windows 7 partition - it still uses NTFS, after all. I'd like to see if running a defragmenter (and manually setting the swap space) makes a difference.

  • lol direct x is laggy

  • no shit they're both almost equal, exceptfor the fact that most developers use directX and that openGL is open source...

  • although a gl fan, i honestly got to say the directX was a bit better, but this could just be the diffrence in computers, i dont know but i dont think ppl should be fighting over what api is better

  • it´s my imagination, or the ubuntu version runs more betther than Windows version?

  • open gl much better framerates

    dx11 better tessellation than a gpu and api that don'tsupport tessellation

    good show

  • Wow, I don't get that bad of performance with DirectX, I get worse performance with openGL.

  • Comment removed

  • they look the same but opengl runs much better = microsoft fail

  • Can we see the demo with directx running on ubuntu?

    he he

  • DirectX is better, than acnewhores' shit.

  • ohhh yeah directx rules all

  • interesting. ironically enough, i would think that OpenGL on linux would benefit more from better driver support.

  • open gl, fast. direct x, alittle more hi def, alittle slower

  • @GhostXoP What do you mean "hi def"? HD is just a resolution...