I made it to "Cubes 36864" so far, and it is lagging like hell, takes around 5 seconds to copy the caption. Let's see if I can go up.
On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Rob Bateman <[email protected]> wrote: > obviously these demos were done a while ago and do not take into account > recent speed-saving features such as triangle caching and object culling. > but for an indicator of raw speed, they're pretty good. > > Rob > > On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 11:43 AM, Rob Bateman <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> test of triangle limit can be found here: >> >> http://away.kiev.ua/away3d/techdemos/ >> >> look for "Triangle limit demos" about half way down the page >> >> cheers! >> >> Rob >> >> On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 3:09 PM, Makc <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> well, with this test people can check themselves how well their brand >>> new ferrari pc or good old ford pc will ride your road, whilst now all >>> you have to tell them, is that some guy in some car was known to ride >>> at 3k poly per frame, which is pretty much nothing. any test with >>> sufficient number of options that everybody can play with will do >>> better than that. >>> >>> On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 1:16 AM, Fabrice <[email protected]> wrote: >>> > >>> > What do you mean by nothing? >>> > I'm just pointing out that this kind of test can be misleading. >>> > >>> > Its like trying to find out howmany cars can ride and how fast on a >>> > given >>> > highway. >>> > A lot if they are all Ferraris riding same high speed, a lot less if >>> > you >>> > drive in the Netherlands a rainy monday morning at 8:00 am. >>> > In the end you know very little of the highway itself... >>> > >>> > Fabrice >>> > >>> > On Feb 7, 2009, at 11:14 PM, Makc wrote: >>> > >>> >> >>> >> 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! >>> >>>>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> > >>> > >> >> >> >> -- >> Rob Bateman >> Flash Development & Consultancy >> >> [email protected] >> www.infiniteturtles.co.uk >> www.away3d.com > > > > -- > Rob Bateman > Flash Development & Consultancy > > [email protected] > www.infiniteturtles.co.uk > www.away3d.com >
