安装 Steam
登录
|
语言
繁體中文（繁体中文）
日本語（日语）
한국어（韩语）
ไทย（泰语）
български（保加利亚语）
Čeština（捷克语）
Dansk（丹麦语）
Deutsch（德语）
English（英语）
Español-España（西班牙语 - 西班牙）
Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲）
Ελληνικά（希腊语）
Français（法语）
Italiano（意大利语）
Bahasa Indonesia（印度尼西亚语）
Magyar（匈牙利语）
Nederlands（荷兰语）
Norsk（挪威语）
Polski（波兰语）
Português（葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙）
Português-Brasil（葡萄牙语 - 巴西）
Română（罗马尼亚语）
Русский（俄语）
Suomi（芬兰语）
Svenska（瑞典语）
Türkçe（土耳其语）
Tiếng Việt（越南语）
Українська（乌克兰语）
报告翻译问题
讨论规则及指引
举报此帖
And yea op, no conflict of interest there at all, valve "benchmarks" open gl when it was building its own competing os, using mostly old games like half life? left 4 dead as test bed? Really? How old are those games again? They used new open gl optimizations on an old game, how is that an apples to apples test of anything. Valve source engines are hardly known for either being cutting edge or efficient for the longest time now in any case.
You've probably noticed that since 2012, that article has made basically no dent in the industry, theres not been a mass switchover to open gl.
A new version of direct x is coming out as we've found out from recent announcements...
Well of course games run on any card, thats what stuff like dx or opengl is for.
But the game engine valve churns out are not considered cutting edge or efficient. Haven't been for the longest time. That honor would go to some other companies like epics unreal engine or cryengine or frostbite engine.
Anyways the recent announcement by microsoft implied they are about to eat amd mantles lunch. So anyone placing their hopes on devs sinking resources into mantel just got smacked:P Just doesn't make sense to now.
You are right its unfair, whats the last time left 4 dead 2 was performance optimized for windows?;)
Valve comes out with new versions of the source engine from time to time but its rather telling very few developers license it. Its not cutting edge and has never been seen as efficient, but its been known for doing odd things like being incredibly cpu bound and other weirdness.
Anyways they weren't testing the newest against the newest which is the problem, but old games which leads to results which have no real meaning.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_OpenGL_and_Direct3D
is the basic saying in it still true:
OpenGL for the Professional work
Direct3D for us non immortals
As i don't know anything really about DX12(except some press posts about it), can anyone tell me, if it will get some more features for the professional work, or is trying to get some cool features exclusively for MS OSes?
I read very often the last 2 month that DX12 will be better than OpenGL, and as i see better mostly happen in ways like Nvidia vs. ATI, Cuda/NVision, ... against the AMD counterparts and in the end everything is the same on the screen, with this pixel looks better on AMD, this one on GForce, ... Is there anything comming like that in DX12, that i missed?
Linux also actually has a native implementation of Direct3D 9 via Gallium3D but its not maintained in sync with Mesa and Gallium3D and is a seperate experimental patchset. There is also a patch for Wine 1.6 that utilizes the native Direct3D implementation versus the OpenGL to Direct3D translator. Many games have been tested with native Direct3D on Linux and games like Skyrim run around 2x faster (higher FPS) with it in the special D3D Wine.
Many devs are looking at porting their apps/games to opengl.
It is possible to make a port for both of course and even easier for devs to do this thanks to Valve and Steam machines since most use directx.
For directx to opengl translation https://github.com/ValveSoftware/ToGL
Credit to Moskeeto for sharing this over at TWI forums http://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/showpost.php?p=1298060&postcount=27
Some more useful links:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DirectX
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct3D
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenGL
I found this http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/09/16/linux_foundation_kernel_report_2013/ very interesting regarding linux kernel development and may be indicative we will be all gaming from mobile devices or phone sized devices in a couple of years. The Desktop is dead. Maybe Microsofts taking over Nokia will be a huge investment and they may very well continue to be industry leaders. Time will tell.;-)
I think the argument to make is that mobile devices (phones & tablets) are replacing the role of PCs for the general consumer who simply just browse the internet, stream videos, and check email. These consumers don't need the power of a PC any longer and that is why mobile is taking over for these class of consumers. Gamers and people who need the power of PCs for things like CAD, graphics design, video production, servers, etc. will continue to demand them.
No they don't that is why they have hdmi connection to go big screen :-) These portable devices are more than capable of running the kind of applications you list. The Desktop is dead. (or is in the eyes of manufcturers) And totally agree with "I think the argument to make is that mobile devices (phones & tablets) are replacing the role of PCs" but for "things like CAD, graphics design, video production,"
I think Valve are foreseeing this and is part of the Steam machine project. How easy would it be to port SteamOS to ARM architecture?
About a year ago after watching an episode of Click (UK techie news program) where the opening sequence was the presenter was burying a desktop PC case in the (think it was) Nevada or Arizona desert and i felt like you in the line of thought "hmmm not quite yet"
Watching a more recent episode of the Gadget Show made the same claim and proved there are already realistic mobile options for the hardcore gamer. They also declared "The Desktop is dead"
Also sales figures indicate a drastic decrease in Desktop sales.
Now they only need to add some more usable input devices, and get something that can be used like a desktop PC, but is underpowered, and locked down with no way to upgrade the hardware or sometimes even replace the built-in OS.
Great. Any links to benchmarks of current PC AAA games running on tablets and cell phones ?
PC hardware no longer becomes obsolete in a couple of years like in the 90's, and when it does, it can be upgraded, which makes counting "sales" somewhat problematic. For example, I have a desktop PC bought assembled from parts many years ago, and since then, all parts have been replaced, some even multiple times. How would your sales stats account for that ?