-Jussi
D3D performance
20000 is not that much. My P2 266MHz with 128MB memory and G400 MAX ran a 10000 polygon "star system" (star, eight planets and a space ships) at 50fps. The scene also had six lights and the polygons were textured. And the engine was not optimized very well.
-Jussi
-Jussi
Well, the good thing about quad/octrees is that if one square is not visible, all the other squares below it in the tree are invisible as well, so you can eliminate some visibility checking. You might want to forget about any poly''s which are directly behind the viewer, and therefore invisible, as these will not be removed by back face culling if they have CCW winding order.
Are you using ComputeSphereVisibility? It is basically a clipping function for getting rid of polys before culling them. However, if you use the quad/octrees or finding if polys are behind you, you could possibly eliminate them from the world-camera transformation, thereby having to multiply fewer vectors by matrices.
------------------------------
#pragma twice
Are you using ComputeSphereVisibility? It is basically a clipping function for getting rid of polys before culling them. However, if you use the quad/octrees or finding if polys are behind you, you could possibly eliminate them from the world-camera transformation, thereby having to multiply fewer vectors by matrices.
------------------------------
#pragma twice
Author
thanks for your suggestions on how to optimize for visibility checking.
i am not doing any clipping yet, i just wanted to see how fast d3d is, pure brute force poly drawing. btw it doesn''t matter much if i use a texture, use speculars, and enable/disable other rendering options.
so what i extract basically from this thread is that i can''t send 20000 polys to the device and expect it to run fast on "not so highend" machines, right?
but i don''t fully understand why the computation effort to implement quadtrees or other clipping methods is lower than just sending the whole scene to d3d and letting it determine is something is visible and not send it to the card then.
but well, i guess that is why it is called "immediate" mode
i am not doing any clipping yet, i just wanted to see how fast d3d is, pure brute force poly drawing. btw it doesn''t matter much if i use a texture, use speculars, and enable/disable other rendering options.
so what i extract basically from this thread is that i can''t send 20000 polys to the device and expect it to run fast on "not so highend" machines, right?
but i don''t fully understand why the computation effort to implement quadtrees or other clipping methods is lower than just sending the whole scene to d3d and letting it determine is something is visible and not send it to the card then.
but well, i guess that is why it is called "immediate" mode
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
