thanks for these suggestions. Here's how it's going so far: On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 1:59 AM, cyrille henry <[email protected]> wrote:
> hello, > > - try using a display list to render a sphere, so that every point don't > have to be send for every sphere. > see exemple 09.openGL/02.displaylist > you can also use a model with a sphere.obj to have the same result. > if the spheres are all moving at once, would a display list still help? Seems like recompilation would have to happen for every sphere for every frame? I haven't tried the model yet... > > - gemhead are slow. i usually have better result using 1 gemhead and 200 > separator, or 200 gemlist, than using 200 gemhead. > It actually performed marginally slower with 1 gemhead and 200 sep and also slower with 200 gemlist > > - try to put somewhere : > [gemhead 1] > [GEMglLightModeli GL_LIGHT_MODEL_TWO_SIDE GL_FALSE] > > it help a lot on my computer (GT 425M), but i don't know on other computer. > could you try and tell me the performance improvement? > (you may have to reverse some light to have close lighting result). > >From your earlier email thread on this list, I already tried that before. No difference. > - don't forget to check that you CPU run fullspeed. (sometimes pd use more > than 100% cpu, but the cpu monitor fail to detect that and the cpu still run > at low speed) > yeah it appears that happened, but forcing the CPU to run full speed makes no difference for some reason. > > - start pd -noaudio if it is an option. > Already was done. > > - you can separate the physical model and the other calculation in a > separate pd instance than Gem. using pd~. This may help > If I turn off rendering, CPU usage with physical model being calculated hovers at about 4%, so this doesn't seem worth the effort. Am I missing something? Sending [res 2( to curve also made no difference. > > well, i think all of this should be enough to draw 10 time more spheres > that what you need, at a good fps. > So far my mileage is varying! :-) Thanks for the help. I guess I'll try the model next. -John > > Cyrille > > Le 09/03/2011 02:16, John Harrison a écrit : > >> I'm working with a high-powered machine but I'm running into a bottleneck >> with Gem. I'm running at 20fps and at times was intending to have as many as >> 200+ lines and spheres on a 1024x768 screen. At around 60 lines/spheres I'm >> already at 50% CPU. I know the problem is Gem because if I stop rendering, >> CPU immediately drops to less than 4%. There's some other manipulations I >> use periodically too causing another 40%+ of CPU so I'm a far cry from my >> 200+ intention while saturating my computational limits. If I turn lighting >> off, BTW, I already gain 10% CPU back (not an option I want to explore.) >> >> I'm not sure what to do and was even considering breaking the rendering >> into independent screens (this machine has 8 cores), then using pix_share to >> recombine them in a "master" instance. I'd have to use pix_snap to capture >> each of the Gem windows in each of the processes, and each one draws about >> 40% CPU when capturing a 1024x768 buffer at 20 fps so besides creating a >> headache for myself this is going to be a lot of CPU overhead. I also don't >> know how the graphics card is fitting into all of this, if it would become a >> bottleneck at some point, how to tell, etc. What's the "top" command for a >> graphics card? :-) >> >> These lines and spheres are nothing special, btw. No texturing, just >> translates, colors, and alpha. the lines are made with curves of 2 points >> each. >> >> Is there some trick or some area of programming or using the graphics card >> I need to be considering? Any thoughts/advice would be appreciated. It's >> strange --- I don't think I'm seeing performance on this machine much better >> than on my not-so-special laptop. >> >> This machine has Nvidia GeForce GTX 460, Ubuntu 10.10 32 bit, Pd-extended >> 0.42-5 binary from the Pure Data site, Intel i7 3Ghz. I'm using Nvidia >> proprietary driver 290.19.06. >> >> When I say stuff like "40% CPU" I mean for a single core. So in theory >> this machine has 800% CPU limit in my nomenclature. But since an instance of >> Pd/Gem runs on only a single core, I have a limit of 100% for any single >> Pd/Gem instance (as most of you already know I'm sure.) >> >> -John >> >> P.S. I'm loving working with Gem and pmpd these days. Awesome stuff, guys! >> :-) >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> [email protected] mailing list >> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> >> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list >> >
_______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
