Hi All, Out of curiosity I did some power tests viewing a paged database with different viewer frame updating configs. Power is measure at the wall using so it's the complete machine. T
103W Compute at idle 103W Lazy frame rendering (based on modified version of Evan's viewer) 125W Continuous framer rate (standard osgviewer) with vsync on (60fps) 156W Continuous framer rate (standard osgviewer) with vsync off (300 - 2000fps) The Lazy frame rendering does bump up it's power consumption when the scene is updating or the view is moving so it's only the time when the view is still that the power consumption goes down, so actual power usage will vary with user interaction. So... lazy frame updates/rendering is good for the power consumption (~20% better) , good for keeping lower computer temperatures and noise, and should be better component life to boot. Makes me wonder if it's not time to add support directly into osgViewer for lazy frame updates/rendering. On the same track, perhaps we should also consider artificially restricting frame rate to prevent running apps running at full pelt due to vsync being off. The later is possible more important under Linux as I've found ATI, Nvidia and Intel drivers neglect to enable vysnc by default. Getting this fixed is another battle though... Robert. _______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
