Thanks for this info. Yeah , I thing this is related to the optimization . Also I tested Flint with Flare & A3D Sprites and the performance is shitty there as well.
Sent from my iPhone On May 4, 2011, at 3:24 PM, ringodotnl <[email protected]> wrote: > Aloha Michael, > > Having lots objects needs to be optimized, the team is looking into > that. > As far as I know, the particles aren't picked-up yet but it's high on > my wish list as well :) > > I don't know if anyone is working on a optimized (gpu) particle system > (Simo?:)) but it's sure something I want to look into when time > allows :) > > Cheers, > Ringo. > > > On May 4, 10:58 am, Michael Iv <[email protected]> wrote: >> Thank for this info man. That is approximately the number of sprites I can >> run too. Although after 400 the FpS is as low as 4-5. I guess for the >> particle system there is a need to develop a separate molehill engine >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On May 4, 2011, at 11:47 AM, Jahiro <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> I've had major performance issues with Sprite3Ds and bitmap materials. >>> I ended up having to write a culling class that uses a quad tree to >>> track down which Sprite3Ds are closest to the camera - I keep the >>> close ones and cull the rest. Would love to see sonme optimizations >>> around Sprite3Ds. >> >>> Michael, I found that running a release build gave me an increase in >>> fps, but still I can't run my app at all with more than 500 sprites at >>> any one time, even with a release build. >> >>> On May 4, 7:33 am, Michael Iv <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Btw , anybody knows if the 2d molehill engine M2d supports depth ? Would >>>> be interesting to test it in correlation with Flint. >> >>>> Sent from my iPhone >> >>>> On May 4, 2011, at 12:20 AM, makc <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>>>> On 3 ôÒÁ, 23:40, Peter Kapelyan <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> Did you try this demo, says like 4096 items >> >>>>> It also says December 24th, 2008
