On 12.07.2011 23:11, Vivian Meazza wrote: > I would even sacrifice a few more fps for the sake of smoothness. > For me the main issue is not so much the framerate, as the way the framerate > is being delivered.
Indeed. Frame rate is misleading - the number only has a meaning if all frames were guaranteed to be evenly spaced (like on a TV/display). But that's not guaranteed for FG, so ignore this number. In order to judge and compare visual quality, look at the worst-case delay in between two frames instead. If a single delay in between two frames is too high, the human eye immediately spots a "stutter". Doesn't help if all the other frames were produced at high rate. And if that stutter happens repeatedly (say every second), it's what limits visual quality. You can enable a better property to compare performance using "View" => "Show worst-case frame delay". It shows the longest delay in between two frames within the last second of simulation (lower left corner). The lower the number, the better. In order to maintain an acceptable 25Hz simulation, the frame delay must never exceed 40ms. Is anyone capable of running FlightGear with either global or local weather enabled with a frame spacing not exceeding 40ms? cheers, Thorsten ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ AppSumo Presents a FREE Video for the SourceForge Community by Eric Ries, the creator of the Lean Startup Methodology on "Lean Startup Secrets Revealed." This video shows you how to validate your ideas, optimize your ideas and identify your business strategy. http://p.sf.net/sfu/appsumosfdev2dev _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
