Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account


#ActualNik02

Posted 17 October 2012 - 12:33 AM

1440*1653 (which equals 2380320) overflows the range of a WORD (typically 0...65535) by a great margin. Have you tried to use 32-bit indices, which would raise the range to 0...232-1? The indices would then be represented as DWORD as opposed to WORD.

That said - independent of the above issue - it may be wise to spatially partition the mesh anyway, if the shading is complex enough. You probably don't see all the geometry at once, at any given moment? There is a fine balance here, though, in that the partitioning itself can use more time than you save by doing it.

#1Nik02

Posted 17 October 2012 - 12:31 AM

1440*1653 (which equals 2380320) overflows the range of a WORD (typically 0...65535) by a great margin. Have you tried to use 32-bit indices, which would raise the range to 0...232-1?

That said - independent of the above issue - it may be wise to spatially partition the mesh anyway, if the shading is complex enough. You probably don't see all the geometry at once, at any given moment? There is a fine balance here, though, in that the partitioning itself can use more time than you save by doing it.

PARTNERS