little is still better than nothing
On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 5:23 PM, Fabrice <[email protected]> wrote: > > map sizes, tris size, mapping, material types, angles, stage.quality, > browsers, player versions... etc all are factors of influence. > I've seen scenes running slow under 500 tris... same for renderings with > just 250 tris drawn of a 60 000 tris model... > Its a nice test, but tells very little in the end. > > Fabrice > > > On Feb 7, 2009, at 4:02 PM, Sean McCracken wrote: > >> >> I'll be doing a test just like that. I'll post my findings Monday. >> >> Sean >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On Feb 7, 2009, at 5:55 AM, Makc <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> Hum, does it mean 3001 triangle would be too much? Someone should do >>> online test app where user could specify fps + features used, and the >>> app would add triangles until fps goes too low. >>> >>> On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 3:53 PM, Li <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> I guess a quick answer would be around 3000 triangles with motion >>>> (someone >>>> correct me if Im wrong). However, Away3D uses something called triangle >>>> caching. The idea behind this is that if an object hasn't moved, and the >>>> camera hasn't moved, then the object would look the same, so why redraw >>>> it? >>>> Doing stuff like this allows for a very larger amount of triangles as in >>>> the >>>> Intel game demo in the away3d site which uses more than 100,000 >>>> triangles! >>>> > >
