No problem at all. After re-reading the thread, I realized that the original email states only one mesh was being animated, which accounts for the performance discrepancy. I should probably also have mentioned for context that these frame rate numbers were on a last gen Mac Book Pro.
-Ken On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 12:01 PM, katopz <[email protected]> wrote: > Hey Ken > > Thanks for sharing, I'll take a look, any other comment/suggestion is > welcome :) > > Cheers > > > On 5 March 2010 00:41, Ken Railey <[email protected]> wrote: > >> So I mentioned once before on this list, but it probably bears repeating >> that I found a significant amount of skin animation time in my case was >> spent applying weights multiple to times to a given vertex position. I am >> seeing even worse performance than the numbers posted below, though. >> >> I just checked out and built the 2282 revision from svn, and I get about >> 10-12 fps in the unchanged Advanced_MultiMarios example according to the >> built in display. After applying a patch to remove duplicate weighting >> operations I get 16-18 fps, which is much better, but still far below the 24 >> posted below. The impact varies by Collada model, of course. In my project >> here, the mesh animation fps nearly doubled, so YYMV. >> >> In any case, I am not sure whether this list allows attachments so I, but >> I have attached a patch against r2282 if anyone wants to try it. I put it >> on pastebin just in case as well: http://pastebin.com/LZgatVL0 >> >> It just de-duplicates the vertex skin vertex indices per mesh based on >> position, which could potentially result in problems if a mesh is designed >> with duplicated vertex positions intentionally for some reason. Also, this >> is creating a memory leak when destroying a mesh, since there is a static >> list of SkinVertex instances used for duplication checking. This is >> probably not the ideal way to approach the issue, but if you just want to >> try it for now to see if you get a performance boost, I would be curious to >> see your results. >> >> -Ken >> >> >> >> On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 3:57 AM, katopz <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hey Riccardo >>> >>> We did notice huge speed drop via collada animation too. >>> It's under investigate for fps leak somewhere... >>> >>> I think it should be uvt calculate with nested Object3d transform >>> cuase this issue >>> Object3D in lite extends Sprite, pros for this is transfrom calculate >>> internal >>> but cons is it also got plenty of Sprite property that never use after >>> extends >>> (e.g filters, soundtransform,mouse,....) >>> >>> I'm start thinking that it's maybe better to redo Object3D extends >>> Object instead >>> and let's hope that will increase fome fps after that >>> >>> In case i'm got long todo list already, if someone sound this should be >>> fun >>> plz do try and yelling for result ;) >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>> >>> >>> On 04/03/2010, Riccardo <[email protected]> wrote: >>> > Hello, >>> > first of all thank you for Away3D, it's a very advanced and useful >>> > library, and very well developed. >>> > >>> > At the moment I'm comparing the rendering speed of Away3Dlite against >>> > Away3D. >>> > My first test was just a sphere, and actually the lite version of the >>> > library is 30% faster. >>> > >>> > But then I tried the animated Marios example and to display just one >>> > of them. >>> > Then I converted the same application to Away3Dlite, basically >>> > switching from the away3d.animators.SkinAnimation class to the >>> > away3dlite.animators.BonesAnimator. >>> > >>> > What I got is that Mario runs at 40 fps with Away3D on my machine, but >>> > it runs at 24 with Away3Dlite. >>> > But Away3Dlite should be supposed to be faster (or at least not >>> > slower), shouldn't it? >>> > >>> > What's going on? Am I doing anything wrong? >>> > >>> > Thank you >>> > >>> >>> >>> -- >>> katopz >>> http://www.sleepydesign.com >>> >> >> > > > -- > katopz > http://www.sleepydesign.com > >
