Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Doom (2016) Vulkan patch has arrived
First comparisons
RX480 OGL vs Vulkan
GTX1080 OGL vs Vulkan
RX480/GTX1070 OGL vs Vulkan
http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/new-patch-brings-vulkan-support-to-doom.html
RX480 OGL vs Vulkan
GTX1080 OGL vs Vulkan
RX480/GTX1070 OGL vs Vulkan
http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/new-patch-brings-vulkan-support-to-doom.html
Comments
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
Pretty much proves that a $450 video card is faster than a $250 video card.
But, Vulkan makes that $250 video card run faster, whereas it doesn't do so much for that $450 one.
Developer used a lot of Vulkan goodies that are available in Vulkan as a low level API (opposed to DX11/OGL) such as Async compute and Shader intrisic funtions to give console level optimizations for AMD by having full access to the GPU and its functions.
OGL was traditionally "NVidias API" but its pretty much obsolete and in very bad state more so because its replaced by Vulkan. OGL simply wasnt used at all in recent years because it was a mess.
IdSoftware engineers are on another level as well, really great things they did with Doom. Peformance increases for both Nvidia and AMD camps (althrough bigger for AMD but that's expected) and generally very impressive work.
Vulkan !
It will benefit developers who want to make andriod-windows games but how many are there actualy...?
This was talked ad nauseam...Vulkan does not bring anything on the table to make developers abandon DX.
so they redid the test
In RL it's your marketing spend that wins the day, not your tech expertise. I'm quite sure Microsoft are not going to simply roll-over and accept that their dominance via DX is finally "over".
Making game on OGL back then would be pointless, OGL was an mess and it would require very big re-learn process as coding on OGL & DX9/10/11 is very diffrent.
DX12 is not an continuation of DX11 and previous Windows APIs, like previous DX were. It is new API that is just named similarly.
It is not easier to go DX12 than Vulkan instead. You're not saving costs coding on DX12 instead of Vulkan this time.
So apples to oranges.
Stop parroting that ignorant gibberish about OpenGL being a mess.
Doom 3, Half Life 2, Left 4 Dead 2, DOTA 2, Far Cry, Serious Sam 3, Deus Ex: HE, Portal 2 and what not, all "notable" titles that run under OpenGL.
We can hear same arguments for more than a decade: OpenGL is multiplatform, provides better performance, it is open API, etc.
Same arguments that did not make developers abandon DX in the past, same arguments we hear for Vulcan now.
OpenGL was never particularly inferior option when it comes to performance and technical potential but those aren't the only factors.
If they were, we wouldn't be using Windows on vast majority of desktops.
Also how few OGL released (majority by Valve as well) titles in last decade prove anything? What's the argument here? I think you forgot to bring it.
Stop parroting same old discussions yourself, if I wanted such discussion I would go re-read old DX vs OGL threads myself.
There is just no reason to do.
It is doable, but it is harder. It is harder to find developers with experience in it, it is not supported as well in drivers and plug-in system of OGL especially OGL 1.x and 2.x is a complete mess. OGL 4.x made some of those things better, but it was too little too late.
You can dig a hole with bad shovel and better shovel, it is doable to do so with both of them, but one experience will be less tiring and faster.
That is why majorty of high profile games in OGL were by Valve because they have interest in it and that is why Valve will be one of most supportive companies behind Vulkan too as they are competitors with MS.
Proof is in the pudding.
Like I said, it is the same type of argument we hear for more than a decade vouching for OpenGL - cross-platform compatibility. This "advantage" is moot in Windows dominated environment.
At best it might provide you some very temporary advantage but in the long run, you know pretty much all desktops will be still using Windows so all you have to do is wait a bit and then go with DX12.
Vulkan is simply lacking any notable advantage - being "as good as DX" provides not enough incentive for a switch.
Also like was mentioned. Its easier to work on DX than OpenGL. Microsoft just makes it easier for developers, provides the tools, APIs, and support. For instance getting a sound API that is cross platform tends to produce buggy results. Much easier just to support xAudio and be Windows exclusive, or have 2 versions one for Windows and one for a different OS.
I can see why a developer would use Vulkan. One set of code for PS4, XBox1, and Windows.
Also Doom is a derivative of the engine used in Rage. Rage wasn't kind on resources. So I expect a few years stewing allowed them to work out the kinks. Still id is one of the best engine makers. For a base engine, they offer the best balance of graphics and performance.
It is about Microsoft wanting to sell 3rd party software&games in it's Windows Store that is integrated in Windows.
Microsoft is making a move that long-term directly threatens Valve main business of Steam Store.
That is why Valve is making all those moves with adopting Vulkan for Dota 2 (and propably all it other games in future), trying to bring Linux to gaming with SteamOS, etc
MS and Valve are on long term collision course, even if SteamOS don't stand a chance against Windows in any predictiable future and Windows Store is still unpopular atm. But first shots are fired.
Then you have other parties involved too. Long term thinking companies are trying create their own digital distribution networks (GoG, Origin, Uplay, iStore, Google Store, etc), bigger ones create or at least co-create/support separate APIs (Metal, Vulkan, DX12), etc