Hi Mo, My guess is that the graphics driver is really struggling to manage all that memory efficiently, not really a surprise given the size of memory you are trying to push at the graphics card.
The better framerate at the start is probably just down to everything sitting in contiguous memory but once the cull takes place the set of memory used changes and the driver probably reorders things, but when the whole scene is visible it then has to trawl through all the data again but this time it's not ordered so efficiently so there are more cache misses. How to solve the problem? I presume you are using VBO's already, if not I would certainly enable these at they are likely to improve things significantly. Another thing you could do is reduce the memory footprint of the data itself. I don't know what form your geometry is set up with right now so can't make specific recommendations. Are you using normals? Are you using per vertex colours, texture coordinates? What dataset types? Robert. On 3 November 2011 14:47, Mo Flanders <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > I'm trying to render Lucy (form the Stanford repository) stable. This model > has about 28-million tris. I wrote an offline spatializer to improve culling. > Every geode has after the spatializer process about 1-million tris. The size > of the model is 2.4 GB - Memory on my NV Quadro 5000 is about 2.5 GB. > > Sync to VBlank is on. Here my problem: > > When I'm start the osgviewer it took about 30-40 seconds - that's okay. The > viewer also ran with an acceptable frame rate. Everything fine. (Stats: Draw > 2.3 GPU: 27.2). If I move Lucy so that only a half or a fourth of the model > is displayed the frame rate increased (culling active). BUT if I move the > model back - that everything is visible again the frame rate is not that I > was expected. (Stats: Draw: 2.68 GPU: 1000.0). Any suggestions? > > I thought - through the culling process the culled geodes could be deleted on > the GPUs memory and they have to reload - but after waiting 120-500 seconds > the frame rate doesn't get better. > Again any suggestions? > > ... > > Thank you! > > Cheers, > Mo > > ------------------ > Read this topic online here: > http://forum.openscenegraph.org/viewtopic.php?p=43703#43703 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > osg-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org > _______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
