Jump to content
14 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

So, here I am with my x1300pro. It ran games great in Windows XP in OpenGL mode (especially Counter-Strike).

 

Now, I switched over to Vista, and it seems as if ATi hasn't bothered implimenting OGL in their drivers, so I'm stuck using crappy D3D.

 

Why?

 

And WTF is going on with ATi? I seriously am considering throwing the card out the window and go back to NVidia.

Link to comment
https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/37322-ati-opengl-vista/
Share on other sites

:blink: good thing you mentioned that... (btw, warez? i dont think vista is available yet.... well.... i know it, and yes im just messing with you, but it is true.) im getting a free vista upgrade but i have an ati card.... so i may not want it.... dont most windows games use direct x though?

ATI still releases "BETA" Status drivers for vista, so opengl is yet to come. most games use DirectX(though Doom3 and Quake4 use GL), but most apps like maya or After effects are OpenGL-accelerated. So this still sucks, but i guess ATI is coming up with a final driver soon.

so we´ll just have to wait.

Greetz

OpenGL is effectively neutered in Vista, and limited to the refresh rate and nothing will help in that respect - there's no way to get around it with a "vertical sync" fix this time. While OpenGL support will be in there come January 30th courtesy of the proper functional production drivers that ATI and Nvidia should release that day or after it, OpenGL is basically crippled now in Vista as compared to previous versions of XP.

 

If you have OpenGL games, stick with XP or set up a dual boot with Vista. It's the only way you're going to get any usefulness out of them anymore.

 

bb

According to MS OpenGL is supposed to run in an DirectX Wrapper, limited to Version 1.4. But i guess (as always) public pressure (games & apps industry) will show MS that there´s no way to get rid of OpenGL in Vista...i hope there´s an ATI OpenGL soon, Maya is nearly unusable without it.

According to MS OpenGL is supposed to run in an DirectX Wrapper, limited to Version 1.4. But i guess (as always) public pressure (games & apps industry) will show MS that there´s no way to get rid of OpenGL in Vista...i hope there´s an ATI OpenGL soon, Maya is nearly unusable without it.

 

That's going to be the gist of all the "hate" spewed on Microsoft from the professional community, that's for sure. If not, all the current pros using Windows will continue to use XP or XP x64 and Microsoft will just pay the price with no one wanting Vista as any possible upgrade path.

 

bb

OpenGL is effectively neutered in Vista, and limited to the refresh rate and nothing will help in that respect - there's no way to get around it with a "vertical sync" fix this time. While OpenGL support will be in there come January 30th courtesy of the proper functional production drivers that ATI and Nvidia should release that day or after it, OpenGL is basically crippled now in Vista as compared to previous versions of XP.

 

If you have OpenGL games, stick with XP or set up a dual boot with Vista. It's the only way you're going to get any usefulness out of them anymore.

 

bb

 

wow, i did not know that... better keep my desktop xp (dont want to pay for vista.... and quake 4, i want to keep quake 4 :borg:) good thing ive been reading this thread! i would have thought it was something i was doing (or wasnt, or was doing wrong....)

Well, the theory works like this:

 

OpenGL will be framerate capped at whatever the refresh rate is for your monitor under Vista. Some would look at that as a bad thing, and for some games it can actually hurt performance and gameplay. Most notably is Quake 3, which I've been playing since long before it ever went on sale - actually played on the Quake 3 bus when it visited Las Vegas here many years ago.

 

Quake 3 has a particular "feature" that allows you to do some pretty wicked physics tricks based on a framerate of 125 fps. One frame per second more, at 126, or one frame per second less, at 124, and those wicked physics tricks don't work, and they don't work at any other framerates at all.

 

Under 2K/XP this isn't hard to accomplish; just set the game to maxfps of 125 and most if not all modern video cards will peg at 125 and just stay there. Quake 3 came out in 1999 so that game is so old even my Intel GMA950 chip can do 125 fps sustained - but not under Vista.

 

Under Vista, even with that variable set at 125 (the command is "seta com_maxfps 125" at the console) those wicked physics tricks simply don't work anymore. They would only work if the monitor I'm on could be set for a 125 Hz refresh rate, and since I'm on a laptop with an LCD, that's simply not going to work anymore, hence my recommendation to keep XP around in a dual boot for OpenGL gaming.

 

Yes, it sucks, but sooner or later we knew Microsoft would have to flat out say "Ok, our OS and the graphics subsystem are based on DirectX APIs, a product of our very own where we control all of it, and that's how it's gonna be..."

 

With Vista, Microsoft finally put their proverbial foot down once and for all on OpenGL.

 

bb

OpenGL is effectively neutered in Vista, and limited to the refresh rate and nothing will help in that respect - there's no way to get around it with a "vertical sync" fix this time.

 

While this OpenGL stuff is {censored}, I can't help but wonder why this old refresh rate issue comes up again. If your getting more frames per second than your monitor can display (it's refresh rate), how are you doing any better by getting those extra frames? They are just thrown out. It's a placebo effect...

Well as I explained, it's not {censored} since in that game and some others based on the Quake 3 engine the frames per second has a dramatic effect on the physics while playing the game. It's not the case with every game ever made, but it is the case with Quake 3 engine powered ones.

 

bb

×
×
  • Create New...