I think that's just a side-effect of having so many pixels covered by
(multiple) quads with alpha. I'm not sure there's much we can do
about that, unless we somehow start dropping sprites. I'll have a
think - 3D cloud perf has always been a big challenge.
Based on my own experiments, I
On Fri, 09 Nov 2012 21:08:07 +0100, Torsten wrote in message
509d62a7.7000...@t3r.de:
Am 08.11.2012 23:24, schrieb Stuart Buchanan:
I'm confused. From my reading of Durk's post, 3D clouds would
appear to work fine for a multi-display system out-of-the-box,
but your comment here indicates
Am 08.11.2012 23:24, schrieb Stuart Buchanan:
I'm confused. From my reading of Durk's post, 3D clouds would appear to work
fine for a multi-display system out-of-the-box, but your comment
here indicates
that there is an issue that requires fixing by restricting the random seed.
Hi Stuart,
On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 11:12 PM, John wrote:
Yes, your are correct it you run a single instance of fg with three
displays with whichever scheme you use; e.g. using the XML file to create a
left, center, and right camera for the scene or one of the video splitters
to break a single large
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 5:03 PM, John wrote:
second, we also run fgfs on a multi-core machine with three graphics cards.
Performance is around 50-60 fps for each core. and thanks to Jan Comans the
3d clouds are sync aross all three displays.
Hi John,
I'm confused. From my reading of Durk's
@lists.sourceforge.net
Sent: Thursday, November 8, 2012 3:24:37 PM
Subject: [Flightgear-devel] 3d clouds on multi-display systems (was Re:
FSWeekend 2012...)
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 5:03 PM, John wrote:
second, we also run fgfs on a multi-core machine with three graphics cards.
Performance is around 50
6 matches
Mail list logo
