Doom Vulkan Vs OpenGL Pascal GTX 1080 Frame Rate Comparison
Home Discussions Workshop Market Broadcasts. Change language. Install Steam. Store Page. Dota 2 Store Page. Showing 1 - 15 of 16 comments. Last edited by Artifact Fail lol iknew it 12 mo ; 29 May, pm. Originally posted by coolhandluke :. View Profile View Posts. Originally posted by High Oktayne :.
Last edited by Captn. Originally posted by Magi :. You actually need a good CPU for dota 2 to max out settings,a decent gpu will do the work.
OpenGL vs. DirectX – what really happened?
Skyliner View Profile View Posts. I just did some ''eye'' testing watching fps meter, since afterburner cant benchmark in vulcan, and i think im getting 10fps more with Vulcan than DX11, thats around fps p max. I tested bot match from hero selection screen untill runes appear, doing the same exact thing with axe, and yeah, up to 10fps more fps i'd reckon with my amd rig. Last edited by Skyliner ; 13 Dec, pm. I got high average fps and low cpu usage on dx 9 compare to dx11 vulkan or opengl.
Last edited by LegendaryHD ; 23 Jul, pm. Zack View Profile View Posts. Per page: 15 30 Date Posted: 29 May, pm. Posts: Discussions Rules and Guidelines. How do you change what heroes the bots play as? New player, How do I play? Note: This is ONLY to be used to report spam, advertising, and problematic harassment, fighting, or rude posts.
Game Development Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for professional and independent game developers. It only takes a minute to sign up. This ground-up design, previously referred to as the Next Generation OpenGL Initiative, provides applications direct control over GPU acceleration for maximized performance and predictability.
Basemark GPU DX12 VS Vulkan Performance Review
Gabe Newell is quoted as being strongly in favour, without further explanation. What exactly is Vulkan's relationship to OpenGL? Update: The Vulkan 1. Originally referred to "glNext," one can infer that Vulkan was likely going to end up being "OpenGL 5," but that the standards body eventually decided that a new name would better coincide with the relatively clean break the API purports to make from existing OpenGL paradigms.
Vulkan's practical advantages to game developers are primarily about control as in, allowing more of it, potentially allowing for better optimizations at the cost of significantly more up-front work on the developer's part.
It is, however, better typed in that not everything is a bare int ; there are relevant typedefs and so on. It is much lower-level than OpenGL. OpenGL might achieve comparable performance to Vulkan, in draw calls per second, but also regarding general driver overhead:. It may take a while, but this cross-platform API could drastically improve 3D performance on certain devices, especially the multi-core application processors that are used in billions of smartphones and tablets.
Sign up to join this community. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top. Home Questions Tags Users Unanswered. What is Vulkan and how does it differ from OpenGL? Ask Question.
Doom benchmarks return: Vulkan vs. OpenGL
Asked 5 years, 1 month ago. Active 2 years, 9 months ago. Viewed k times. Anko Anko Leonard Nimoythe actor of Spock a very popular character recently died onso speculation abounds that the name was a tribute. However, it was coincidental: The Vulkan trademark request was filed on ; before Nimoy's death. Active Oldest Votes. Specifically: The API is oriented around asynchronous generation of command buffers across multiple threads and sequenced processing of those buffers to a command pipeline.
This reflects the realities of modern hardware. Thread and memory management tasks are left to the application, not the driver, allowing game developers more control over those behaviors and thus potentially more accurate tailoring of those behaviors to their individual game's needs.
Validation and diagnostics layers can be independently enabled, allowing in theory for better tools integration with the API something OpenGL itself has suffered from and disabling of excessive validation, in theory allowing " the graphics on level three " to be that much more performant.
There's no hard API differential between mobile and desktop versions, which will in theory ease the porting of cross-platform games and if nothing else reduce version-checking headaches that everybody hates. At least that is what I've read so far.
Or will Vulkan cover both low-level and high-level operations? Mar 5 '15 at Anko Alex Alex 1 1 silver badge 2 2 bronze badges.Home Discussions Workshop Market Broadcasts. Change language. Install Steam. Store Page. Global Achievements. Teagon View Profile View Posts. What should I use for low-endish PC? Most of the benchmarks on net are from high-end PC Is Vulkan always the better choice or am I missing something Last edited by Teagon ; 21 Jul, pm.
Showing 1 - 15 of 73 comments. Erick View Profile View Posts. If your low-end system can support Vulkan, go for it. The performance boost can get you a higher framerate and even raise the graphical quality. Of course if you can't use Vulkan, you can still use OpenGL, but that is not really viable if you get a chopp framerate like me.
Dro View Profile View Posts. Vulkan should behave better on AMD Radeon hardware as their OpenGL drivers are of very poor quality - and mostly dysfunctional, really. That isn't to say the game won't run on them, it will An ex-Valve graphics programmer did a piece on OpenGL back inthings have not changed much, or at all, since. Originally posted by Teagon :. This is generally why AMD video cards are mediocre at best in games like Fallout 4 heavy D3D11 with multithreadingbut are savage in games like Doom.
NVIDIA has a dedicated developer's driver for Vulkan, it's worth a shot if you feel like tinkering, it supports the very latest extensions, but the performance will be poor until they create a new GPU architecture that is optimized for that - even on Pascal and the mighty Titan Xp, Vulkan performs worse than it otherwise should. It is from an older branch, but the developer drivers are exceedingly stable, if that's your thing.
Originally posted by Dr. Dro :. Well as ancient as the Q is, it still performs in the same ballpark as an AMD FX processor, so there's that to consider.
The Q is probably the great processor of its time, given it's turning 11 years old and still relatively relevant today. It's very low end by today's standards, true, but it's a perfect match for the Ti. Since NVIDIA's drivers aren't crappy, then by using Vulkan you're forgoing much of the magic they've put in the drivers to make the game run great.
Last edited by Teagon ; 20 Jul, pm. Sure is brother. But that is always a good machine to keep around, you can repurpose it into a machine for retro gaming running Windows XP or maybe into a home theater PC by adding a Blu-ray reader to it.
I recently got a QX for my old build, so I put my Q on my dad's computer, alongside one of my old GTX s, I must say that power efficiency aside that machine is capable of anything a basic user would want. Originally posted by Kalsolette :.
Last edited by Dr. Dro ; 20 Jul, pm.Do you know that these games do not use DirectX? However, despite that advantage, majority of games today still use DirectX. To give our readers reliable information about this topic, I asked game developers that use OpenGL.
Their answers are a bit lengthy and I have initially thought of paraphrasing it but decided to deliver their answers as is so there would be no misrepresentations. Here are the questions I asked them:. For those not familiar, Croteam is the developer of The Talos Principlethe 1st game to use Vulkan in February Even DirectX 11 already required a very complex structure to be fast.
Where you now see that DX11 is still sometimes faster than DX12 or Vulkan in some games, it is due to extensive optimizations inside the driver. Optimizations that were created and maintained at no small cost of engineering resources.
They are not ideal, as compromises still had to be made to make the APIs abstract and portable, but they are way, way better than the old state-machine-based ones. The old ones were kinda in denial of the facts like e. But the biggest improvement from the end user perspective is not just average performance, but finally control of frame stutter.
This is now exposed to the application so that the application can have control of what is cached and prepared when — and thus prepare it in load time or stream in the background. It eg.
That frame will suffer a slight stutter since the driver has to recompile some shaders or similar. In Vulkan and DirectX 12, the app has complete control over this and can do this better. Most game engines were written in the age of the old APIs, so their first implementations of the modern ones were based on doing the same kind of on-the-fly caching as the driver would previously do. But the ability is there now. And as the engines improve, we now see more and more benefits being used.
So in theory, you could have a stutter-free game now, and some are already getting quite close to that goal. So in short — the questions you are asking are perhaps a bit misstated.When Doom showed up back in May, I ran a bunch of benchmarks to see how it performed.
At the time, we were promised that a patch with support for the Vulkan API would show up "soon after launch," which apparently meant around two months.
The good news is that after all this waiting, the public Vulkan patch went live last week ; there's also a FAQ on Doom's Vulkan support that has additional information. So what is Vulkan and why should anyone care? The key element we want to discuss is what it means to be 'low-level' and how that changes the game engine.
This gets technical, but it will help set the stage for what we see in the benchmarks. Software developers typically use programming libraries to help make their jobs easier.
Imagine you want to create a game for Windows; there's a lot of work involved in doing so, but many common tasks can be handled by a programming library—an API, or Application Programming Interface. Rather than reinventing the wheel for each new program, tasks like graphics, audio, window resizing and positioning, reading and writing to storage, and more can simply use an existing library to make life easier.
Focusing specifically on the realm of graphics, the API helps handle things like texturing, lighting, and creating all the amazing visuals we see in modern games. But using a library also involves some level of abstraction, and in the world of graphics it means you have a driver that supports the set of functions in the library, and it maps those to the actual hardware.
In the past decade or two, most graphics APIs have been 'high-level,' meaning there's a larger amount of abstraction. This generally makes the job of the programmers easier, at the cost of some performance optimizations. Some developers have wanted ways to extract more performance from the hardware, however, and they've basically asked for 'low-level' access to the hardware.
That means more work in some cases, but it can also improve performance if you know what you're doing. And that brings us to Vulkan and DirectX Ultimately, the end goal is the same: allow developers to extract more performance from the hardware if they want to put in the effort. There's some politics involved with the low-level API discussion as well.
The biggest item is that AMD supports a feature called asynchronous compute, which is basically the ability to mix and match graphics and compute instructions in the execution units. Fundamentally, AMD and Nvidia architectures aren't the same, and this is why we run benchmarks.
That makes the Fury X percent faster. I picked the Fury X and GTX Ti for a good reason: on paper the Fury X should be substantially faster, but in practice the Ti ends up with a small lead of around five percent the Fury X does lead by five percent at 4K, however. With a low-level API, AMD's ACE has the potential to help better utilize certain resources, particularly if the developers spend some effort to better optimize their code.
Instead of utilizing percent of the available execution units, they might be able to get to percent utilization, and that could make a big difference when it comes to the end user's experience.
Now combine the above discussion with AMD's presence in all the current generation of consoles, and AMD has a vested interest in finding ways to improve the performance of their hardware. This is arguably why they created Mantle, and why they're so interested in DirectX But couldn't AMD accomplish something similar by simply spending a lot of resources to optimize their DirectX 11 drivers?
What about Nvidia—don't they have features and hardware elements that are handicapped by high-level APIs?New to Shacknews?
Signup for a Free Account.
What are the differences and which should you choose? Now that Red Dead Redemption 2 has finally made its way to the PC platform, thousands of players are hopping into the game to get a taste of the wild west.
Like most multiplatform games that release on PC, Red Dead Redemption 2 offers visual upgrades and options not available in its console counterpart. In addition to settings for increasing draw distance of objects, the precision of physics simulations, and the quality of graphical effects, the game also offers PC users two different graphics APIs. Both Vulkan and DirectX 12 are selectable from the graphics options menu.
What do these APIs do and which is best for you? API is short for application programming interface. When it comes to video games on the PC, developers almost always use one of the popular APIs to bring the games to life on the platform. These APIs allow the developers to have the game engines talk to the hardware without the developers having to code directly for each specific variant.
It has been used in titles like DoomThe Surge 2, and various Linux game ports. The only differences between them are how they interact with your PC hardware. The way the game performs with these APIs can differ depending on what hardware is being used. Frame rate fluctuations are less intense using DirectX 12, so it may feel a bit more consistent in practice, even if benchmarking shows it to be slightly behind Vulkan when calculating raw frame rates.
Ultimately, you are likely to get a great experience with either of the APIs. Switching between the two options requires the game to be restarted for the change to take effect. For more guides, walkthroughs, videos, and other content for Red Dead Redemption 2, keep an eye on our RDR 2 hub page. Chris Jarrard likes playing games, crankin' tunes, and looking for fights on obscure online message boards.
He understands that breakfast food is the only true food. Don't him. Vulcan seemed to stutter. Already have an account?
Computer Graphics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for computer graphics researchers and programmers. It only takes a minute to sign up. So I was reading thisI sort of got the reason why there are a lot more games on Microsoft windows than on any other OS. What I don't understand is why would any developer sacrifice compatibility? That is simply a financial loss to the company. I understand that OpenGL is kind of a mess, but that should hardly be a issue for experts.
Even if it is, I think that people would go a extra mile than to incur a financial loss. I think they switch between the APIs. I am aware that this question might be closed as being off-topic or too broad, I tried my best to narrow it down. The inertia thing is very important. As of today, there are many many APIs, and a common practice is to use a Game Engine that abstracts over them.
For example, consider that. Sign up to join this community. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top. Home Questions Tags Users Unanswered. Ask Question. Asked 3 years, 9 months ago. Active 2 years ago. Viewed 29k times.
Archmede 4 4 silver badges 16 16 bronze badges. AB AB 1 1 gold badge 3 3 silver badges 12 12 bronze badges. SE a couple years ago. Active Oldest Votes. DirectX comes with way better tools for developing e. As for Windows vs Linux, you have to consider that when there is an actual standard due to marketing and historical reasons for that see Why do game developers prefer Windows?