Re: GL vs. Performer

New Message Reply Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

Rob Jenkins (robj++at++barney.reading.sgi.com)
Tue, 11 Jul 1995 09:03:27 +0100

On Jul 11, 9:42am, Cho Tae Hee wrote:
> Subject: GL vs. Performer
> Hi
>
> I'm a novice in Performer and have a question. In making an object
>
> using Performer, making pfGeode and inserting it into DB is
>
> faster than directly using GL functions in draw callbacks?
>
> or,... it depends?
>
> Sorry for my short English and Thanks in advance...
>
> chaos++at++venus.sait.samsung.co.kr
>-- End of excerpt from Cho Tae Hee

I don't know the definitive answer to this - you could try some benchmarks with
a simple case, but then this may be misleading as Performer optimisation may
only show a big perfomance gain when the geometry gets complicated. I'm sure
the Performer team can give you more info. but personally I would think that in
the long term you would benefit by using pfGeodes - 'nicer' code, Performer
optimises for the hardware you are on, you get the benefits of culling or
flattening geometry and the notion of a bounding volume of a pfGeode all of
which may be tricky if you are just using GL.
I'm sure you will get other responses for this.

Cheers
Rob

-- 
________________________________________________________________
Rob Jenkins, Software Support Group, Silicon Graphics UK Ltd.       
1530 Arlington Business Park, Theale, Reading, UK, RG7 4SB. 
tel 01734 257736, fax 01734 257553, email robj++at++reading.sgi.com,

New Message Reply Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b2 on Mon Aug 10 1998 - 17:51:39 PDT

This message has been cleansed for anti-spam protection. Replace '++at++' in any mail addresses with the '@' symbol.