![]() ![]() That's not to say I'm disappointed, it's more just for reference. I didn't have a framerate counter, but I'd wager it was somewhere in the high teens. With four threads, the most I can stand is 848x480 with minimum settings (pressed "result defaults", then selected minimum). Is there any thought to optimizing further for SSE4.x? There's supposedly a lot of extra floating point calculation power hiding in these Penryn cores if you go that direction. I'll go give it a whack on Track Mania Nations, but given the current results, I'm relatively impressed. SS 2.01 results from my 3.6Ghz Q9450 (framerate is the lowest integer value observed in the meter, threading was verified via Task Manager)Īnd yes, I double-checked that last set of scores - the framerate really didn't change between 2 and 3 cores, but the 4th core suddenly made it a whole lot better. You're CPU limited anyway: It can be well worth doing some extra work on the application side to reduce the workload of the software renderer. Reduce overdraw: One of the most effective approaches is to first render the scene to the z-buffer only, then perform a second pass with color calculations enabled. Everything else needs to be converted anyway and it's often not worth the bandwidth savings. Use data formats 'native' to the CPU: 8-bit, 16-bit, 32-bit data elements are typically faster. ![]() It won't speed up hardware rendering but it will affect software rendering. For instance to render a 2D menu, disable bilinear filtering and mipmapping. Nothing comes for free: Any feature you use translates to extra code. Anyway, here are a few basic guidelines (off the top of my head): Currently we have a whitepaper explaining the overall architecture, but we exchange optimization details on a per-customer/application basis. ![]() Click to expand.That might become a good idea in the near future. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |