On Wednesday 09 July 2003 00:53, Bernie Bright wrote:
> On Tue, 08 Jul 2003 22:07:06 +0100
> Lee Elliott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > On Tuesday 08 July 2003 21:58, Curtis L. Olson wrote:
> > > Lee Elliott writes:
> > > > Hello all,
> > > > 
> > > > While we're discussing texture sizes, I'd like to hear how people get 
on
> > > > 
> > with 
> > > > high-poly models.
> > > > 
> > > > While I have some problems if a lot of texture space is needed, I 
don't 
> > seem 
> > > > to have any trouble with what I'd consider to be high poly models.
> > > > 
> > > > What are other peoples experiences in this respect?
> > > 
> > > I think we have some capacity (especially on higher end systems) for
> > > cranking more polygons.  However, we need to be careful because we
> > > might find ourselves throwing 10-100 of these aircraft into a single
> > > scene (i.e. landing at a busy airport.)  We might be able to get away
> > > with 1 high polygon count model, but if we have 10-100 it will kill us
> > > ... and if they are all parked at the airport, we might not be able to
> > > use LOD to bail us out (like we could if the aircraft were all airborn
> > > and flying normal routes with normal separation.)
> > > 
> > > In general, for real time simulation, it's a really good idea to try
> > > to keep the polygon count down.  This is one of the biggest challenges
> > > with building models for real time simulation.
> > > 
> > 
> > Is there any way to come up with a rough guidence figure?
> 
> Three 747 models parked at KSFO brought my system to a virtual halt.  The
> first two were okay, losing about 5 or 6 fps each.  This was on a 32MB
> GeForce2.
> 
> Bernie

Does it make any difference if you toggle texturing off?

LeeE


_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Reply via email to