How can quads be 40% faster than tris?!!?! It is impossible. What card do you have?!
Member of the Shove Pouya Off A Cliff club, SPOAC . (If you wish to join, add this line to your signature.)
Member of "Un-Ban nes8bit" association, UNA (to join put this in your sig)
"C lets you shoot yourself in the foot rather easily. C++ allows you to reuse the bullet!"
Quads vs. Triangles (And various simple questions)
Ati radeon 9000 agp(64mb ddr)
I just drew a 480x480 area using 32x32 tiles,no display list or nofin''. got around 900 fps with one of them ,triangles i guess, and my quad code gets 1300+ all times.
I just drew a 480x480 area using 32x32 tiles,no display list or nofin''. got around 900 fps with one of them ,triangles i guess, and my quad code gets 1300+ all times.
It is impossible. Try drawing 1000 quads vs. 2000 triangle strips.
Member of the Shove Pouya Off A Cliff club, SPOAC . (If you wish to join, add this line to your signature.)
Member of "Un-Ban nes8bit" association, UNA (to join put this in your sig)
"C lets you shoot yourself in the foot rather easily. C++ allows you to reuse the bullet!"
Member of the Shove Pouya Off A Cliff club, SPOAC . (If you wish to join, add this line to your signature.)
Member of "Un-Ban nes8bit" association, UNA (to join put this in your sig)
"C lets you shoot yourself in the foot rather easily. C++ allows you to reuse the bullet!"
quote:Original post by TinkleBear
Ati radeon 9000 agp(64mb ddr)
I just drew a 480x480 area using 32x32 tiles,no display list or nofin''. got around 900 fps with one of them ,triangles i guess, and my quad code gets 1300+ all times.
Well, of course, if you use immediate mode. Try drawing a few thousand indexed triangle lists or strips from a compiled vertex array and you''ll see the difference.
- JQ
quote:Original post by GamerSg
How is it that render quads it N X 2. It should be N X 4.
As far as i know Triangles strips are the fastest followed by Triangles with Quads being the slowest. You wont see any difference until you render a few thousand of them.
No, it should be N * 2 like I said... 4 vertices in a quad, but 2 triangles... so 2 triangles per 4 vertices = 2 vert''s per tri average... so Number of Triangles (N) * 2.
Quads are faster, as you don''t have to make as many vertex calls (if using glVertex calls), and there is less data that must travel around, since each 2 triangles takes 4 vertices, as opposed to 2 triangles taking 6 vertices with triangles. Quads are simply drawn as 2 triangles, so there is no reason they should be slower than triangles, since there is less over-head (function call and/or memory bandwidth).
quote:Original post by CPPMaster Poppet
It is impossible. Try drawing 1000 quads vs. 2000 triangle strips.
Member of the Shove Pouya Off A Cliff club, SPOAC . (If you wish to join, add this line to your signature.)
Member of "Un-Ban nes8bit" association, UNA (to join put this in your sig)
"C lets you shoot yourself in the foot rather easily. C++ allows you to reuse the bullet!"
Yes, triangle STRIPS are faster than quads, like I said. He''s talking about regular trianbles, which are the slower.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
