“Sort of” and “no.”
Microsoft has a long history of trying to sabotage widespread OpenGL adaption,
to push developers towards Direct3D. This has been done by including only
Direct3D drivers by default, pushing system builders to strip OpenGL from the
pre-installed drivers, and various other nasty tricks that have caused
problems for developers and their less tech savvy users.
(Hardcore gamers are generally not a problem in this regard, as they tend to
download proper drivers directly from the respective vendors anyway.)
As to the SDL (as in, software rendering) part, this is a problem with the way
modern PC hardware is designed. Any normal PC (most integrated graphics
solutions included, strangely enough) have a crippling bottleneck between the
main CPU and VRAM. Writing speeds tend to be just barely sufficient for
fullscreen animation at (by modern standards) low resolutions, whereas reading
may well be slower than reading from a hard drive. You’ll have the same
problems with Linux, *BSD, BeOS or whatever, as there is little an operating
system or any other software can do about it.
Basically, you should be using (or at least optionally supporting) OpenGL
and/or Direct3D rendering whenever performance is critical.On Monday 24 October 2011, at 19.24.20, Yuri David Santos wrote:
Hi,
I’m using SDL for Windows and Linux games. I see it is running considerably
slower in Windows. I don’t know, is there a good reason for that? I heard
that Windows purposely makes some process slower, like OpenGL and SDL. Is
that true?
–
//David Olofson - Consultant, Developer, Artist, Open Source Advocate
.— Games, examples, libraries, scripting, sound, music, graphics —.
| http://consulting.olofson.net http://olofsonarcade.com |
’---------------------------------------------------------------------’