CODEWITHSUNDEEP
opengl-esgpurender
heLomaN
heLomaN

Reputation: 1794

Is it true that OPENGL ES 3.1 is slower than OPENGL ES 2.0?

Found an article here OpenGL ES versus Vulkan, who is the performance king? mentioned that:

enter image description here

"The problem with OpenGL ES 3.1 is that while the graphics look immensely better than OpenGL ES 2.0, the performance hit is so great that games are basically not playable, looking at the image above comparing OpenGL ES 2.0 and 3.1 on my Nexus 6P shows that the exact same scene runs at a third of the frames per second compared to OpenGL ES 2.0. This is where Vulkan comes in, offering at least the same in graphics quality, but with improved performance. So how does Vulkan do?"

I can't imagine that 3.1 slower than 2.0 with the same scene. Had the author mistaken the image? Seems the right image have GI.

Upvotes: 1

Views: 6441

Answers (2)

thatGuy
thatGuy

Reputation: 122

I took a look at this article also while searching the same question myself, and please note that in it the author used unreal to do the comparisons. Enabling different options in unreal such as gl es 3 doesnt only change the gl version but also adds more realism that the engine assumes that gl es 3 can handle.

Upvotes: 2

Reaper
Reaper

Reputation: 757

Had the author mistaken the image?

To me it seems that the author of that article is just dumb.

Just a quote from that article:

Vulkan still will not perform as well as the lower graphics capable OpenGL ES 2.0, as Vulkan displays a lot more on screen and the scenes it can render are a lot more complex

It's like saying that a Ferrari will not perform as well as a bicycle because you can ride 10 meters in a bicycle in 10 seconds, but can't drive 100 kilometers in a Ferrari in the same amount of time.

Now, about the image from that article: It's not the same in OpenGL ES 3.1 and 2.0. I can at least see a more realistic lighting with reflections, as well as smoother looking walls, in the ES 3.1 screenshot.

To compare things like that you need at least to make sure that the resulting images are the same for both cases. If you are rendering a scene without postprocessing effects in one case, and with postprocessing effects on the other, then it's not the right comparison. Also, If you are rendering the scene with, say, a deferred renderer in one case, and a forward renderer in the other, then it's again not the right comparison, even if you got the same image.

Upvotes: 6

Related Questions