ATI Cards dominate D3D modes. NV cards are faster in OpenGL

[jerry_enCater]

I have seen many reviews.

Finally

I came to the conclusion ATI Cards dominate D3D modes,
And NV cards are faster in OpenGL modes.

 

[PrzemKo]

Kinda remids nv - 3dfx situation from old days.

 

[Bambers]

Find some benchmarks of jk2 and rtcw. Both opengl and both based on the q3 engine yet in these the 9800pro will be faster. (according to extremetech and digitlife/ixbt anyway)

 

[KimB]

First of all, Bambers, I looked at the JK2 benches over at extremetech, and the FX 5900 Ultra came out ahead.

Anyway, this has been my experience. In benchmarking UT2k3, which does offer both Direct3D and OpenGL modes, I found that my GeForce4 does better in OpenGL than Direct3D, but the Radeon 9700 Pro did the opposite.

I think it just goes to show that of those games that do offer multiple choices of API (UT2k3, Serious Sam, for example), reviewers should take the time to actually use the different API's.

 

[Bambers]

First of all, Bambers, I looked at the JK2 benches over at extremetech, and the FX 5900 Ultra came out ahead.

Oops looks like my memory is playing up, must be getting old

I'm right about rtcw though, on reading however it seems thats a recent performance drop in one of the drivers, odd.

 

[Doomtrooper]

Direct3D doesn't have proprietary extensions, and almost all OpenGL games contain these extensions from Nvidia, Serious Sam..Never Winter Nights,DroneZ,Glmark...


Direct3D doesn't allow that, and certainly why some games run better on Nvidia hardware.

Max Payne, Dungeon Siege, UT 2003 show different results.

 

[Reverend]

Find some benchmarks of jk2 and rtcw. Both opengl and both based on the q3 engine yet in these the 9800pro will be faster. (according to extremetech and digitlife/ixbt anyway)

Bad examples of OGL games -- they're fairly CPU dependent. But then there is a undetermined line between CPU speed/dependency, difference in GPU and/or memory (not just NVIDIA, in case "GPU" is a patented NV word!) clock rates (=fill rates and bandwidth) and resolutions used as reference. The original Q3 game should still be fairly useful for what this topic is about however but we need to use competing video cards with fairly similar fillrate and bandwidth for a study about OGL and D3D performance amongst IHVs. We're, then, talking about ICD quality... is this what this discussion is about?

 

[RussSchultz]

is this what this discussion is about?

Who is better than who, of course. Isn't that what most topics are about?

 

[Sage]

no, 3DLabs is faster in openGL. duh.....

 

[gkar1]

NO Nvidia drivers are hacked with static clipping planes. That's all that matters

 

[PVR_Extremist]

First of all, Bambers, I looked at the JK2 benches over at extremetech, and the FX 5900 Ultra came out ahead.

Anyway, this has been my experience. In benchmarking UT2k3, which does offer both Direct3D and OpenGL modes, I found that my GeForce4 does better in OpenGL than Direct3D, but the Radeon 9700 Pro did the opposite.

I think it just goes to show that of those games that do offer multiple choices of API (UT2k3, Serious Sam, for example), reviewers should take the time to actually use the different API's.

A little OT: Chalnoth m8, how do you enable OGL in UT2003 please?

 

[Archaeolept]

First of all, Bambers, I looked at the JK2 benches over at extremetech, and the FX 5900 Ultra came out ahead.

Anyway, this has been my experience. In benchmarking UT2k3, which does offer both Direct3D and OpenGL modes, I found that my GeForce4 does better in OpenGL than Direct3D, but the Radeon 9700 Pro did the opposite.

I think it just goes to show that of those games that do offer multiple choices of API (UT2k3, Serious Sam, for example), reviewers should take the time to actually use the different API's.

A little OT: Chalnoth m8, how do you enable OGL in UT2003 please?

edit the .ini file. there's a line that lets you set OGL as your API. UT2K3 seems to have been more heavily tested for D3D, though.

 

[Randell]

TBH I always thought it was still a given that nVidias OGL ICD was the most mature and efficent for comsumer/gaming GPU's?

 

[David G.]

I think it has a lot to do with specific driver optimisatins .

 

[Sage]

well probably the BEST OpenGL you can get on a consumer GPU is to get an nVidia and use RivaTuner+Softquadro to turn it into a pseudo-Quadro =P the moment UT2K3 demo came out I found the little rem'd opengl renderer line and switched to OpenGL (which was then in a very beta state, as i understand) and OMFG it was simply amazing what I got out of my pseudo-Quadro. But still, thats strictly speedwise. Qualitywise you cant beat a WildcatVP 880 Pro (265MB RAM and 16x intelligent schotastic MSFSAA) for 299 USD!!! (thats the proposed price, afaik they havnt hit the market quite yet)

 

[kyleb]

ut2003's opengl renderer omits some specal effects like the projector shadows.

 

[Ailuros]

I found that my GeForce4 does better in OpenGL than Direct3D...

Either that´s a very "weird" NV25, or I have a very wrong impression about my own NV25 when it comes to API´s in UT2k3. You don´t have any benchmark results by any chance, do you?


***edit: OT- while 16bit colour depth is perfectly acceptable in D3D, I´d say give it a try in OGL

 

[Sage]

if you Quadroize it then it should do much better in OpenGL.

 

[Ailuros]

Can't say I ever benched in OGL, but it never seemed really faster to me. The advantage of OGL in UT2k3 though is, that LOD is a lot better.

Benchmark.exe/V.2223/1024x768x32

OGL:
flyby: 134.46
botmatch: 67.93

D3D:
flyby: 149.71
botmatch: 65.08

I'm obviously blind.

 

[Sage]

well youll only get the benifit from OpenGL if you are running Quadro drivers as they have a MUCH improved ICD.