Erik Hofman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Take a look here:
> http://www.a1.nl/~ehofman/fgfs/comparison.html
> This table is based on performance reports from FlightGear users who
> have sgi equipment. But be aware that this is about the default startup
> position (stationary at KSFO) which seems a bit heavy on the scenery for
> alder hardware.
I have the impression that the default position is very
un-representative - because of two reasons:
1.) If you get only 3 fps and do some modifications on the hardware, an
improvement of 10 % won't get noticed, because FG still talks about
3 fps,
2.) The amount of objects that are in viewable range on the default
position varies very much over the time,
Martin.
--
Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are !
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
