On Fri, 31 Jan 2003, Arkadi Shishlov wrote: > On Fri, Jan 31, 2003 at 10:26:13AM -0800, Ian Romanick wrote: > > There are two typical ways to go about imporving texture upload > > performance in OpenGL applications. One is through the use of OpenGL > > extensions. There are several extensions available (or available any > > You are talking about extensions here, but my P3 600MHz Radeon8500 box > with ATI binary drivers is able to push normal frame rates in MPlayer > with 720x480 movies with OpenGL output driver at 80% CPU load. > 30% with XVideo. > It use regular glTexSubImage2D, so it is either R100 or DRI beign slow > in this case (if CPU is powerful enough). > I don't know much about extensions you mentioned, but how much you'll > save with MPlayer? One memcpy() (assuming it doesn't wait for texture > upload)?
Actually, iirc, all the drivers actually implement glTexSubImage2D the same way as glTexImage2D. They always upload the entire texture image -- there was a comment I remeber seeing about the subimage index calculations being wrong. Fixing this to only upload the subimage would help the performance of glTexSubImage2D. -- Leif Delgass http://www.retinalburn.net ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
