just cause maybe someday the dxplugin and the opengl will become compatable with each other or sumthin and you can use them together? idk just throwin it out there..
Use them together? what the hell? They are completely different API's... Good luck on fitting the round peg in the square hole....
(08-13-2009, 04:17 AM)hansenderek Wrote: [ -> ]just cause maybe someday the dxplugin and the opengl will become compatable with each other or sumthin and you can use them together?
???
(08-13-2009, 04:17 AM)hansenderek Wrote: [ -> ]idk just throwin it out there..
It's apparent, i doubt that will EVER happen. *Not trying to crush your hopes and dreams but..
(08-13-2009, 04:27 AM)Unknownforce Wrote: [ -> ]Use them together? what the hell? They are completely different API's... Good luck on fitting the round peg in the square hole....
LOL
(08-13-2009, 04:13 AM)CacoFFF Wrote: [ -> ]Not really, leaks have been long before the general slowdown.
Just to stay ontopic, about making a DX plugin, the only solid reason I see for using one is the lack of OpenGL support.
Integrated Intel gpus won't even perform properly on a solid DX plugin, so why should one be made?
i know right? i have been trying to tell people with intel "gpus" that they wont be able to run games full speed even with a dx plugin, so upgrade, of course nobody listens
(08-13-2009, 04:17 AM)hansenderek Wrote: [ -> ]just cause maybe someday the dxplugin and the opengl will become compatable with each other or sumthin and you can use them together? idk just throwin it out there..
Say what? Trying to put DX and OGL together in anyway is asking yourself to enter into developer hell. Anyways, why would you need to do that? Each API can do everything the other can do (for general purposes).
The DX9 plugin is broken because the Cg Vertex and Pixel Shader code fail to compile with the CgD3D9 API and no one can figure out why.
Both Direct3D 11 and OpenGL can do the same work on the GPU, however the APIs have their own advantages
Direct3D:
- Strongly supported by ATI Graphics Cards
- More cards support it including really junky ones
- Easier API to work with
- Dedicated SDK and MSDN Library
- Control over where textures are stored (VRAM or RAM)
OpenGL:
- Cross-Platform
- Smaller Library
- Legacy API - allowing more direct control over the graphics engine
- Open Source
- Vendors can add their own extensions to it
I want to make this into a poll. Let's see what plugin should be more of a priority. Also, if we could get ahold of some old source code for the dolphin revisions between 2100 and 2600, we could examine the code in the directx plugin and find out what went wrong with the new code. As usual, the version I request to see is 2390, because it has had the best working directx plugin. My computer ran at 20fps with this one, and not a lot of graphical issues. I was impressed with it, I mean just look at my specs. The opengl plugin for me has always been blury. Now a days neither plugin works for me in the newer revisions. I like directx better, because it gives off more clarity, and with the 9.0c version, people can use 3d ripper dx, if that's alright with you guys. I already know people who do this, but that's my opinion.
The Poll Makes 0 Sense O.o
Nvm, i think you just worded it weirdly >.<
Basically, if you want the DirectX plugin to be fixed and looked into more than the OpenGL plugin, vote for directx. If you want the OpenGL plugin to be fixed and looked into more than the DirectX Plugin, vote for opengl. I hope that makes a little more sense.
No reason for the poll because the devs have already stated their opinion(not only their opinion, but what's actually happening) on the matter. OpenGL wins due to Cross-Platform compatibility. They aren't going to abandon Linux and Mac users, and since the only reason directx would need to be developed is for a minor group that have the IGPU's, there's not enough demand for it, nor is there a point in trying to get IGPU's to run Dolphin due to insufficient processing power on those chips. Simple solution... UPGRADE.