Hello,
Which screen size ?
With my old GPU Geforce 9600 GT at 1024x800 i never got less than 24 fps
(usually 30 fps). It is when using FG 2.10.
Decreasing on the fly the screen size increase the fps.
I am using Linux KDE4.
However with the recent FG Git, i am losing at least 30 % of performances :(
same scenery same conditions.
At the moment i can't explain that "issue".
BTW my rembrant parameters are :
<map-size type="int">8192</map-size>
<filtering type="int">3</filtering>
<num-cascades type="int">4</num-cascades>
<cascade-far-m index="0" type="float">1.0</cascade-far-m>
<cascade-far-m index="1" type="float">5.0</cascade-far-m>
<cascade-far-m index="2" type="float">50.0</cascade-far-m>
<cascade-far-m index="3" type="float">500.0</cascade-far-m>
> I've had a my first short go with Rembrandt on my new machine yesterday. The
> test case was a small airport in Sulawesi (Indonesia) (WAAJ) where I'm
> discovering a very nice scenery. There are no static or shared models to
> speak of, there is some forest around, and that's basically it. I chose
> fair weather, i.e. a modest cloud cover. The aircraft was the PAF team
> DR-400 in the latest version.
>
> All Rembrandt functions work out of the box very nicely. I started with a
> dawn scene and tried the landing light illumination first. This gave me a
> good 30 fps. I then switched to noon and tried shadows. I have to say that
> since I am more the VFR virtual pilot, I almost never fly at night,
> lightmap for internal illumination work fine for me, and so shadows are the
> main selling point of Rembrandt which attracts me.
>
> The initial shadows coming up by default were rather ragged and flickery
> (the last is a problem for me, I tend to get headache when looking at some
> sort of flickers unfortunately), so I played with shadow map size, cascade
> ranges and filtering till I had a nice result. To my dismay, at this point
> the framerate counter gave me a mere 15 fps (no shader effects on at this
> point).
>
> For comparison, the same scene renders in Atmospheric Light Scattering with
> all details maxed out (including tree motion) with solid 60 fps.
>
> Am I doing anything wrong? Did I miss any optimization which makes the
> shadows run fast enough? Am I just unlucky and my system has some
> unspecified problems chewing Rembrandt? Does anyone else get significantly
> higher framerate out of shadows with filtering? I am running on an GeForce
> GTX 670M, which is usually a pretty fast beast.
>
> I mean, maybe it's just me, but this appears to confirm a suspicion I wrote
> earlier that trying to pack ALS functionality into Rembrandt will end up
> being way too slow. If I have a mere 15 fps before any shaders, then I
> can't reasonably apply 800 lines of extra computations and expect no
> performance impact.
>
> Does anyone have a semi-solid case which would argue that this would be fast
> enough? I'm sort of trying to make my mind up if I should focus on that
> before the next release (which is why I did the test), but it seems
> hopeless to me. It's okay and flyable as it stands, but I don't see how to
> cram lots of extra stuff in.
>
> * Thorsten
GrthTeam
https://sites.google.com/site/grtuxhangar
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows:
Build for Windows Store.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
