Norman Vine writes: > Curtis L. Olson writes: > > > > Think about this another way ... do a profile of flightgear. I bet > > you will find that the graphics rendering portion of FlightGear takes > > 90-95% of the entire application work load. > > FWIW here are my results from the last time I profiled FGFS trying > to determine what percentage of time was actually spent drawing > This was about a year ago, but I doubt if things have changed much > > > % cumulative self self total > > time seconds seconds calls ns/call ns/call name > > 59.20 0.74 0.74 40047 18478.29 19976.49 fgRenderFrame(void) > > 20.00 0.99 0.25 39218 6374.62 6374.62 fgUpdateTimeDepCalcs(void) > > 16.00 1.19 0.20 fgMainLoop(void) > > Norman
Also we need to be careful to consider that actual profiling numbers could vary drastically between platforms, video cards, cpus, operating systems, video drivers, profiling tools :-), etc. And also it should be pointed out that FlightGear has a *very* CPU/time expensive startup and initialization sequence. This also needs to be considered when interpretting the profiling numbers. The longer you run flightgear, the more the actual running app numbers will become dominant, and the less dominant the initialization numbers will be. Regards, Curt. -- Curtis Olson IVLab / HumanFIRST Program FlightGear Project Twin Cities curt 'at' me.umn.edu curt 'at' flightgear.org Minnesota http://www.menet.umn.edu/~curt http://www.flightgear.org _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
