On 17.01.2021 04:08, Clemens Eisserer wrote:
To be honest I don't have an explanation why results are *that* good, but on the other hand - XRender is still clearly faster for 1x1 fillRect and not *that* much slower for the maskfills.
It is quite interesting! But it would be good to check what code was affected by this parallelization. I meant we cannot draw much-much faster than OGL draw its primitives, so even w/o parallelization if we will call flush after each fillRect/etc(mimics the in-place rendering on the current thread), we can speed up something but at the end, we will call OGL on one thread. So executing some code in parallel to the actual OGL rendering we speed up the whole benchmark so much! looks like something(code executed in parallel) works ineffective. -- Best regards, Sergey.
