Hi all,
I am trying to render 4800 x 900 using my application.
But due to the extremely large rendering area, i was thinking of rendering to 2400x 450 first and then somehow stretch it to fit to 4800x900.
I just have 2 queries
1. Will this act be beneficial in terms of FPS
2. How to do this, i am currently rendering 6 viewports on the 4800 x 900 screen, if i reduce to half the size, then how do i finally stretch it in the end.
Probably Simplest DirectX Question on Viewports
[font="Calibri"]1.[/font] [font="Calibri"]It depends. If you are pixel shader limited it should help. In any other case it’s unlikely[/font]
[font="Calibri"]2.[/font] [font="Calibri"]You need to render to a texture first and the render this texture to your final back buffer. During this step you can stretch it.[/font]
[font="Calibri"]2.[/font] [font="Calibri"]You need to render to a texture first and the render this texture to your final back buffer. During this step you can stretch it.[/font]
Author
[font="Calibri"]1.[/font] [font="Calibri"]It depends. If you are pixel shader limited it should help. In any other case it’s unlikely[/font]
[font="Calibri"]2.[/font] [font="Calibri"]You need to render to a texture first and the render this texture to your final back buffer. During this step you can stretch it.[/font]
I am using a pixel shader to render spotlights, so i guess it would make a difference there
But regarding rendering to a texture, wouldn't rendering it to a texture and then re rendering it to the screen cause more loss ( in terms of fps) then gain
[font="Calibri"]This additional transfer will have its price. That’s the reason why I noticed that you should be pixel shader limited. If you are doing only simple operations without a high overdraw the limit is more likely the raster operation processor (ROP) or the memory interface. In this case rendering to smaller targets would not help. [/font]
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement