Re: [Flightgear-devel] CVS - Frame Rates under Windows XP - plus movie comments AJ's Car

2008-04-04 Thread Forums Virgin Net
Dear Vivian,
Your figures sound about right as I also get very 
frustrated with this also, in fact when I am filming making the movies I have 
found something interesting!

When I use mibs for example and set it on a fixed heading to do straight in 
line pan scans for panoramic shots such as moving in a straight line from point 
A to point B the first time it stutters like hell, then I use the reverse 
button (Brake) and pan back out (Reversing along the same path) and do this 
several times forward and back then for some odd reason maybe due to caching it 
becomes smooth and no stutter, this is a technique I now use all the time when 
I am making the OLeg Movies, but unlike you I can't afford to Buy expensive new 
graphics cards so YES I agree the frame rates do need more work, and based on 
the method I tried in the point A - B scenario maybe something in the caching 
needs looking at, maybe even some sort of dynamic pre-processing of scenery 
just ahead might solve these issues or using a dynamic quality resolution 
technique to reduce the scenery quality being displayed based on cpu usage 
might help?

Regards, Aerotro

PS,
I am planning and currently working on part 4 of OLeg's Adventures some 
scenarios require video using AJ's Duplo car and I want to simulate a speeding 
car with smoke from the tires / exhaust and so I will most likely be adding 
special effects for this, unless someone wants to make the job easier by 
implementing a smoking exhaust to the car? Every bit of help counts :oD



Vivian Meazza Wrote:

Message: 8
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 19:43:18 +0100
From: Vivian Meazza vivian.meazza@
Subject: [Flightgear-devel] CVS - Frame Rates under Windows XP
To: 'FlightGear developers discussions'
flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Hi
 
About 10 days ago I got fed up with low frame rates using OSG around KSFO,
so I went out and bought the best nVidia AGP card that I could find - 7600gs
with 512Mb of VRAM. I fitted it with great anticipation to my machine - P4
2.8Ghz/800Mhz FSB with 1.5 Gb of RAM running XP - and, precisely NOTHING. No
change in frame rate between the new card and the old - a FX6200 with 256Mb
VRAM - for FG-OSG-HEAD. On the other hand plib-HEAD flies. Here are some
comparative results:
 
snip-
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference 
Register now and save $200. Hurry, offer ends at 11:59 p.m., 
Monday, April 7! Use priority code J8TLD2. 
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel


Re: [Flightgear-devel] CVS - Frame Rates under Windows XP

2008-04-02 Thread Durk Talsma
On Tuesday 01 April 2008 22:39, Vivian Meazza wrote:

 So I conclude that:
 1. There is a problem with replay,
 2. MinGW has about the same performance gap between OSG and plib on XP as
 gcc does on Linux.
 3. MinGW performance is probably as good as it gets.
 4. Either MSVC8 doesn't compile such fast code as MinGW, or there is a
 setting wrong somewhere.

It's been a while ago since I last looked at at, but back in November I put a 
lot of effort into optimizing the replay system's memory usage. At the time, 
this was one of our prime candidates for the infamous periodic stutter bug. 
Because we were aiming for a release, I placed the job of forward porting 
these changes to CVS/HEAD rather low on my TODO list. I thought I had already 
finished most of these ports, but it is possible this one still remains to be 
done. I will have a look.

Anyways, it looks like it is possible that CVS/HEAD has a much less efficient 
replay system than CVS/PLIB.

Cheers,
Durk

-
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel


Re: [Flightgear-devel] CVS - Frame Rates under Windows XP

2008-04-02 Thread Frederic Bouvier
Quoting Durk Talsma :

 On Tuesday 01 April 2008 22:39, Vivian Meazza wrote:
 
  So I conclude that:
  1. There is a problem with replay,
  2. MinGW has about the same performance gap between OSG and plib on XP as
  gcc does on Linux.
  3. MinGW performance is probably as good as it gets.
  4. Either MSVC8 doesn't compile such fast code as MinGW, or there is a
  setting wrong somewhere.
 
 It's been a while ago since I last looked at at, but back in November I put a
 lot of effort into optimizing the replay system's memory usage. At the time,
 this was one of our prime candidates for the infamous periodic stutter bug.
 Because we were aiming for a release, I placed the job of forward porting
 these changes to CVS/HEAD rather low on my TODO list. I thought I had already
 finished most of these ports, but it is possible this one still remains to be
 done. I will have a look.

 Anyways, it looks like it is possible that CVS/HEAD has a much less efficient
 replay system than CVS/PLIB.

According to this chart, it seems you are right :
http://cvs.flightgear.org/cgi-bin/viewvc/viewvc.cgi/source/src/Aircraft/replay.cxx?view=graphsortby=filepathrev=PRE_OSG_PLIB_20061029

-Fred

-- 
Frédéric Bouvier
http://my.fotolia.com/frfoto/  Photo gallery - album photo
http://fgsd.sourceforge.net/   FlightGear Scenery Designer

-
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel


Re: [Flightgear-devel] CVS - Frame Rates under Windows XP

2008-04-02 Thread Durk Talsma
On Wednesday 02 April 2008 12:14, Frederic Bouvier wrote:
 According to this chart, it seems you are right :
 http://cvs.flightgear.org/cgi-bin/viewvc/viewvc.cgi/source/src/Aircraft/rep
lay.cxx?view=graphsortby=filepathrev=PRE_OSG_PLIB_20061029

 -Fred


Okay, I've just committed the port from CVS/PLIB.

Cheers,
Durk

-
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel


Re: [Flightgear-devel] CVS - Frame Rates under Windows XP

2008-04-01 Thread Frederic Bouvier
Selon Vivian Meazza :

 CoreDuo 2,6 Ghz and a Gainward 8800GT. Not surprised it runs well!!! In
 particular I think the CoreDuo does threading better than the P4. In case
 you haven't noticed, the 7600gs is coping easily with the output from FG-OSG
 - that's why the frame rates didn't increase.

[...]

 Could we have some _real_ numbers to compare instead of hearsay.

 This is not a OSG versus plib discussion - it's a why OSG is so poor on XP
 discussion

I have a Core2 Duo 2.66 ( E6600 ) and a 7600GT. I always saw the greatest fps
increase after upgrading CPU and was disappointed by several GPU-only upgrade.

All I can tell is that with the Seahawk, at KSFO, I have 75hz steady ( with
vsync  on ) if I wait for 2 minutes. In the meantime, fps vary greatly from 40
to 75, during the threaded model loading process. And this is done with a 50%
CPU usage.

-Fred

-- 
Frédéric Bouvier
http://my.fotolia.com/frfoto/  Photo gallery - album photo
http://fgsd.sourceforge.net/   FlightGear Scenery Designer

-
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel


Re: [Flightgear-devel] CVS - Frame Rates under Windows XP

2008-04-01 Thread Tim Moore
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Heiko Schulz wrote:
|
| AND, with Linux and the same Graphics Card 7800 GS
| 512 MB, i can notice the
| same decrease of performance from FG-PLIB  to FG-OSG
| ,
| I ever had   about 20% less performance   with OSG.
|
| I am running FG on  AMD ATHLON 3200 (32 bit) with
| AGP  mothercard.
|
| May be OSG is more accurate with modern (recent)
| CPU. (i must test it).
|
|
| Cheers
|
|
| --
| I notice a difference between OSG and Plib too- but
| this is known!
| But we can discuss and find out, how to make it
| faster- time for Tim to answer!

I suggested that Vivian post his experiences here. I've been working with him
for several months on trying to resolve these problems. I'm convinced that his
machine is cursed :) I don't develop on Windows and so have run out of ideas
other than general suggestions. I'm hoping that more experienced Windows
developers will have some ideas for how to proceed.

One thing seems clear: the OSG version uses more memory than the plib version
does. Therefore there is a more memory pressure; the entire system needs to
deal with this. Memory allocation, especially on Windows, seems to be expensive.
~ Vivian had some improved results today turning off the replay system, which 
may
give us a clue. I think it will only help performance to, in general, optimize
the memory usage of FlightGear.

Tim

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFH8h3jeDhWHdXrDRURArN1AKCvTYByAdaiWoizFreC2ueU3W2/OgCfS14j
6nNqt9a0Vq6VS11PzbD53BU=
=OhsK
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel


Re: [Flightgear-devel] CVS - Frame Rates under Windows XP

2008-04-01 Thread LeeE
On Tuesday 01 April 2008 07:52, Frederic Bouvier wrote:
 Selon Vivian Meazza :
  CoreDuo 2,6 Ghz and a Gainward 8800GT. Not surprised it runs
  well!!! In particular I think the CoreDuo does threading better
  than the P4. In case you haven't noticed, the 7600gs is coping
  easily with the output from FG-OSG - that's why the frame rates
  didn't increase.

 [...]

  Could we have some _real_ numbers to compare instead of
  hearsay.
 
  This is not a OSG versus plib discussion - it's a why OSG is so
  poor on XP discussion

 I have a Core2 Duo 2.66 ( E6600 ) and a 7600GT. I always saw the
 greatest fps increase after upgrading CPU and was disappointed by
 several GPU-only upgrade.

 All I can tell is that with the Seahawk, at KSFO, I have 75hz
 steady ( with vsync  on ) if I wait for 2 minutes. In the
 meantime, fps vary greatly from 40 to 75, during the threaded
 model loading process. And this is done with a 50% CPU usage.

 -Fred

That 50% CPU usage will be one of your cores running flat out while 
the other one is idling:)

Hmm...  [looks at watch and wonders if it's time to post another 
missive about the _need_ for a redesign of FG to run on MPP systems 
as it gets ever clearer that significant increases in computing 
power have more or less stalled in terms of height (cpu speed) and 
in future, will come instead from width (parallel processing) - 
FG's current design is effectively obsolete]

LeeE

-
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel


Re: [Flightgear-devel] CVS - Frame Rates under Windows XP

2008-04-01 Thread Heiko Schulz

--- Frederic Bouvier [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:

 Selon Vivian Meazza :
 
  CoreDuo 2,6 Ghz and a Gainward 8800GT. Not
 surprised it runs well!!! In
  particular I think the CoreDuo does threading
 better than the P4. In case
  you haven't noticed, the 7600gs is coping easily
 with the output from FG-OSG
  - that's why the frame rates didn't increase.
 
 [...]
 
  Could we have some _real_ numbers to compare
 instead of hearsay.
 
  This is not a OSG versus plib discussion - it's a
 why OSG is so poor on XP
  discussion
 
 I have a Core2 Duo 2.66 ( E6600 ) and a 7600GT. I
 always saw the greatest fps
 increase after upgrading CPU and was disappointed by
 several GPU-only upgrade.
 
 All I can tell is that with the Seahawk, at KSFO, I
 have 75hz steady ( with
 vsync  on ) if I wait for 2 minutes. In the
 meantime, fps vary greatly from 40
 to 75, during the threaded model loading process.
 And this is done with a 50%
 CPU usage.
 
 -Fred
 
Noticed too, taht the fps the very first seconds are
not stable- but after that there is fps variation to see.

still in work: http://www.hoerbird.net/galerie.html
But already done: http://www.hoerbird.net/reisen.html


  E-Mails jetzt auf Ihrem Handy.
www.yahoo.de/go

-
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel


Re: [Flightgear-devel] CVS - Frame Rates under Windows XP

2008-04-01 Thread LeeE
On Tuesday 01 April 2008 13:10, Anders Gidenstam wrote:
 On Tue, 1 Apr 2008, LeeE wrote:
  Hmm...  [looks at watch and wonders if it's time to post
  another missive about the _need_ for a redesign of FG to run on
  MPP systems as it gets ever clearer that significant increases
  in computing power have more or less stalled in terms of height
  (cpu speed) and in future, will come instead from width
  (parallel processing) - FG's current design is effectively
  obsolete]

 Yes, it might be time for that. However, the recent work on model
 loading is certainly a step in the right direction.

 One problem is to identify parts that we will gain anything from
 moving to a separate thread. I have seen the FDM suggested in the
 past, but even on my (ancient) system JSBSim corresponds to about
 1-5% of the CPU usage (estimated by looking at the rate sim time
 progresses in the standalone version of JSBSim). Andy has told me
 YASim is more expensive (it does more at runtime) but it is
 probably at most 20-30% of the CPU usage (guesstimate :). So, the
 prospective gains there do not look that large.
 Doing some profiling might make the picture clearer.

 I think the main targets for parallelization are the rendering
 pipeline and various add-on systems, like the traffic manager.
 Personally, I'd like to have threads (possibly with very limited
 interaction abilities) available in Nasal for isolated and
 computation intensive tasks (e.g. fast forwarding my fire
 cellular automaton :).

 Just my 2 (euro) cents..

 Cheers,

 Anders

Without a fairly deep understanding of how the various subsystems 
within FG have been implemented and work it's difficult to make 
worthwhile suggestions, especially while the developers are still 
getting their heads around the intricacies of OSG...

...but fwiw:)

I think the single most important step would be to run the graphics 
subsystem in it's own process, splitting it from everything else.  
On multi-core systems this would mean that the graphics subsystem 
gets the resources freed by the 'everything else' and 
the 'everything else' gets the resources freed by the graphics 
subsystem.

This would be a relatively small gain for the graphics subsystem and 
a much bigger gain for everything else, where it's arguable that 
it's needed, but it would allow much higher and more consistent 
rates in the FDMs, autopilot controllers  filters and Nasal.

The thing is though, that the graphics subsystem needs a lot of data 
and it's questionable that it could be transferred quickly enough.  
Therefore it's likely that the scenery  model loaders would need 
to be included in the graphics subsystem so once it's told what 
data it needs it can fetch it itself.

With a core to itself, the 'everything else' part of FG would 
benefit less by further splitting but if it was well designed it 
should make plug-ins much easier to implement and maintain.

In the longer term, thought needs to be given to 'box-rendering' the 
graphics - splitting the scene into several regions and processing 
them in parallel - but this is much easier said than done, 
especially as rendering is h/w based.  Still, this is the sort of 
thing that newer versions of OGL/OSG will _have_ to address in the 
future, if they haven't already got some features in this area.

LeeE

-
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel


Re: [Flightgear-devel] CVS - Frame Rates under Windows XP

2008-04-01 Thread Maik Justus
Hi
Frederic Bouvier schrieb am 01.04.2008 08:52:
 I have a Core2 Duo 2.66 ( E6600 ) and a 7600GT. I always saw the greatest fps
 increase after upgrading CPU and was disappointed by several GPU-only upgrade.

 All I can tell is that with the Seahawk, at KSFO, I have 75hz steady ( with
 vsync  on ) if I wait for 2 minutes. In the meantime, fps vary greatly from 40
 to 75, during the threaded model loading process. And this is done with a 50%
 CPU usage.

   
Here (WinXP, Core2 Duo 3Ghz, 8800GT) FG consumes more than 50% CPU. 
Directly after starting (when the 3D scenery is displayed for the first 
time) the CPU usage is 90%. Therefore the loader-thread seem to run on 
a different core than the rest (or is there another thread?).

 -Fred

   

Maik

-
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel


Re: [Flightgear-devel] CVS - Frame Rates under Windows XP

2008-04-01 Thread Vivian Meazza
Tim Moore

 Sent: 01 April 2008 12:35
 To: FlightGear developers discussions
 Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] CVS - Frame Rates under Windows XP
 
 
 -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
 Hash: SHA1
 
 Heiko Schulz wrote:
 |
 | AND, with Linux and the same Graphics Card 7800 GS
 | 512 MB, i can notice the
 | same decrease of performance from FG-PLIB  to FG-OSG
 | ,
 | I ever had   about 20% less performance   with OSG.
 |
 | I am running FG on  AMD ATHLON 3200 (32 bit) with
 | AGP  mothercard.
 |
 | May be OSG is more accurate with modern (recent)
 | CPU. (i must test it).
 |
 |
 | Cheers
 |
 |
 | --
 | I notice a difference between OSG and Plib too- but
 | this is known!
 | But we can discuss and find out, how to make it
 | faster- time for Tim to answer!
 
 I suggested that Vivian post his experiences here. I've been 
 working with him for several months on trying to resolve 
 these problems. I'm convinced that his machine is cursed :) I 
 don't develop on Windows and so have run out of ideas other 
 than general suggestions. I'm hoping that more experienced 
 Windows developers will have some ideas for how to proceed.
 
 One thing seems clear: the OSG version uses more memory than 
 the plib version does. Therefore there is a more memory 
 pressure; the entire system needs to deal with this. Memory 
 allocation, especially on Windows, seems to be expensive. ~ 
 Vivian had some improved results today turning off the replay 
 system, which may give us a clue. I think it will only help 
 performance to, in general, optimize the memory usage of FlightGear.
 

Just an update. Using

 --prop:sim/replay/disable=true

Makes FG-OSG as smooth as plib is with

 --prop:sim/replay/disable=false

I tried Csaba's MinGW build - frame rates are improved by 20% across the
board, and only 20% below plib (which of course might see further
improvement with a MinGW build.

So I conclude that:
1. There is a problem with replay, 
2. MinGW has about the same performance gap between OSG and plib on XP as
gcc does on Linux.
3. MinGW performance is probably as good as it gets.
4. Either MSVC8 doesn't compile such fast code as MinGW, or there is a
setting wrong somewhere.

Vivian




-
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel


Re: [Flightgear-devel] CVS - Frame Rates under Windows XP

2008-03-31 Thread Heiko Schulz

--- Vivian Meazza [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:

 Hi
  
 About 10 days ago I got fed up with low frame rates
 using OSG around KSFO,
 so I went out and bought the best nVidia AGP card
 that I could find - 7600gs
 with 512Mb of VRAM. I fitted it with great
 anticipation to my machine - P4
 2.8Ghz/800Mhz FSB with 1.5 Gb of RAM running XP -
 and, precisely NOTHING. No
 change in frame rate between the new card and the
 old - a FX6200 with 256Mb
 VRAM - for FG-OSG-HEAD. On the other hand plib-HEAD
 flies. Here are some
 comparative results:
  
 Aircraft: Seahawk   
  OSG
  PLIB
KSFOGeneral  Ocean  
 KSFOGeneral
 Ocean
 every check box turned to off:
 25  30  60  
  4580
 117
 with everything checked, traffic manager on:
15   25  36  
  2550
 80
 as above with shadows and 3d clouds:
 
  1840
 65
 as above but with trees and precipitation:
10   15 40 (but the rain
 turned itself off!)
  
 Aircraft: c172p 
 every check box turned to off:
   3340  60  
 4590
 130
 with everything checked, traffic manager on:
   2733  40  
 3050
 75
 as above with shadows and 3d clouds:
 
 3050
 65
 as above but with trees and precipitation:
   1525  30 
  
 Aircraft: Buccaneer (particles)
 as  above but with trees and precipitation:
818  20 
  
 In addition to the difference in frame rate, OSG
 also stutters, while plib
 is commendably smooth. I've tried both executables
 generated here using
 MSVC8, and Fred's pre-cooked binaries. So far as I
 can see the results are
 identical. I've profiled both OSG and plib - for
 anyone interested, some of
 the results are here:
  
 ftp://abbeytheatre2.org.uk/fgfs/OSG/
  
 While I am no expert in profiling code, the results
 seem to me to show that
 we are getting stuck in the bowels of OSG somewhere,
 while plib is
 well-ordered, with no particular cpu-hog, which is
 pretty much what the
 above table indicates.
  
 My principle concern is that there appears to be
 very little headroom for
 future developments in OSG for shadows, or 3d
 clouds, or landing lights, on
 what is a not-very-old and pretty capable machine. I
 would be grateful if
 some Windows user(s) could confirm at least the
 shape of these comparative
 results. I understand that Linux users get much
 better results than these.
 We might be getting towards the point when Windows
 users are stuck with plib
 (and that's not all bad) while Linux users get to
 play with all the new
 goodies. We might be drifting away from our cross
 platform ethic.
  
  
 Vivian
  
 Luckily the new card wasn't terribly expensive
 otherwise I would be quite
 p'd off
  
Hi,

With the recent built by Fred I found the old stutters
again- but I could sovle this for me.

But I can't see any of those problems you have- I can
run FGFS with all features we have - plus heavy
self-written interactive traffic and mp. And the best-
I can run other programs beside too without any
problems (blender as an graphic example!)

You should know, that you have to set some things on
your pc, Nvidea and FGFS:

- switch Vsync in the Nvidea settings
- use the frame-rate-throttle!

I use a CoreDuo 2,6 Ghz and a Gainward 8800GT - but
there were people in the german forum and the official
forum (kid's playground) having no problems with the
recent OSG-built on lower pc. 
And the difference between a 8800 and 7600 isn't
really far.

Even on my old PC with a FX5200 OSG run very pretty at
least. 
It is true that OSG is slower than plib- but the
graphic is much better (exxept the 3D-clouds and the
missing shadows)- please not another discussion about
OSG vs Plib!

Regards
HHS

still in work: http://www.hoerbird.net/galerie.html
But already done: http://www.hoerbird.net/reisen.html


  E-Mails jetzt auf Ihrem Handy.
www.yahoo.de/go

-
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel


Re: [Flightgear-devel] CVS - Frame Rates under Windows XP

2008-03-31 Thread Vivian Meazza
Heiko Schulz wrote

 Sent: 31 March 2008 20:45
 To: FlightGear developers discussions
 Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] CVS - Frame Rates under Windows XP
 
 
 

Vivian Meazza  schrieb:

 
  Hi
   
  About 10 days ago I got fed up with low frame rates
  using OSG around KSFO,
  so I went out and bought the best nVidia AGP card
  that I could find - 7600gs
  with 512Mb of VRAM. I fitted it with great
  anticipation to my machine - P4
  2.8Ghz/800Mhz FSB with 1.5 Gb of RAM running XP -
  and, precisely NOTHING. No
  change in frame rate between the new card and the
  old - a FX6200 with 256Mb
  VRAM - for FG-OSG-HEAD. On the other hand plib-HEAD
  flies. Here are some
  comparative results:
   
  Aircraft: Seahawk   
   OSG
   PLIB
 KSFOGeneral  Ocean  
  KSFOGeneral
  Ocean
  every check box turned to off:
  25  30  60  
   4580
  117
  with everything checked, traffic manager on:
 15   25  36  
   2550
  80
  as above with shadows and 3d clouds:
  
   1840
  65
  as above but with trees and precipitation:
 10   15 40 (but the rain
  turned itself off!)
   
  Aircraft: c172p
  every check box turned to off:
3340  60  
  4590
  130
  with everything checked, traffic manager on:
2733  40  
  3050
  75
  as above with shadows and 3d clouds:
  
  3050
  65
  as above but with trees and precipitation:
1525  30 
   
  Aircraft: Buccaneer (particles)
  as  above but with trees and precipitation:
 818  20 
   
  In addition to the difference in frame rate, OSG
  also stutters, while plib
  is commendably smooth. I've tried both executables
  generated here using
  MSVC8, and Fred's pre-cooked binaries. So far as I
  can see the results are
  identical. I've profiled both OSG and plib - for
  anyone interested, some of
  the results are here:
   
  ftp://abbeytheatre2.org.uk/fgfs/OSG/
   
  While I am no expert in profiling code, the results
  seem to me to show that
  we are getting stuck in the bowels of OSG somewhere,
  while plib is
  well-ordered, with no particular cpu-hog, which is
  pretty much what the
  above table indicates.
   
  My principle concern is that there appears to be
  very little headroom for
  future developments in OSG for shadows, or 3d
  clouds, or landing lights, on
  what is a not-very-old and pretty capable machine. I
  would be grateful if
  some Windows user(s) could confirm at least the
  shape of these comparative
  results. I understand that Linux users get much
  better results than these.
  We might be getting towards the point when Windows
  users are stuck with plib
  (and that's not all bad) while Linux users get to
  play with all the new
  goodies. We might be drifting away from our cross
  platform ethic.
   
   
  Vivian
   
  Luckily the new card wasn't terribly expensive
  otherwise I would be quite
  p'd off
   
 Hi,
 
 With the recent built by Fred I found the old stutters
 again- but I could sovle this for me.
 
 But I can't see any of those problems you have- I can
 run FGFS with all features we have - plus heavy
 self-written interactive traffic and mp. And the best-
 I can run other programs beside too without any
 problems (blender as an graphic example!)
 
 You should know, that you have to set some things on
 your pc, Nvidea and FGFS:
 
 - switch Vsync in the Nvidea settings
 - use the frame-rate-throttle!
 
 I use a CoreDuo 2,6 Ghz and a Gainward 8800GT - but
 there were people in the german forum and the official
 forum (kid's playground) having no problems with the
 recent OSG-built on lower pc. 
 And the difference between a 8800 and 7600 isn't
 really far.
 
 Even on my old PC with a FX5200 OSG run very pretty at
 least. 
 It is true that OSG is slower than plib- but the
 graphic is much better (exxept the 3D-clouds and the
 missing shadows)- please not another discussion about
 OSG vs Plib!
 

CoreDuo 2,6 Ghz and a Gainward 8800GT. Not surprised it runs well!!! In
particular I think the CoreDuo does threading better than the P4. In case
you haven't noticed, the 7600gs is coping easily with the output from FG-OSG
- that's why the frame rates didn't increase. 

And what would Vsync do? The frame rate never gets anywhere near the point
at which it might operate. I've tried frame-rate-throttle - it just makes it
worse. The graphics are absolutely no different here between OSG or plib
that I can see, and why should they be? 

Could we have some _real_ numbers to compare instead of hearsay.

This is not a OSG versus plib discussion

Re: [Flightgear-devel] CVS - Frame Rates under Windows XP

2008-03-31 Thread gerard robin
On lun 31 mars 2008, Vivian Meazza wrote:

SNIP
 
  Even on my old PC with a FX5200 OSG run very pretty at
  least.
  It is true that OSG is slower than plib- but the
  graphic is much better (exxept the 3D-clouds and the
  missing shadows)- please not another discussion about
  OSG vs Plib!

 CoreDuo 2,6 Ghz and a Gainward 8800GT. Not surprised it runs well!!! In
 particular I think the CoreDuo does threading better than the P4. In case
 you haven't noticed, the 7600gs is coping easily with the output from
 FG-OSG - that's why the frame rates didn't increase.

 And what would Vsync do? The frame rate never gets anywhere near the point
 at which it might operate. I've tried frame-rate-throttle - it just makes
 it worse. The graphics are absolutely no different here between OSG or plib
 that I can see, and why should they be?

 Could we have some _real_ numbers to compare instead of hearsay.

 This is not a OSG versus plib discussion - it's a why OSG is so poor on XP
 discussion

 Vivian




Hello, Vivian

You are right  :)

AND, with Linux and the same Graphics Card 7800 GS   512 MB, i can notice the 
same decrease of performance from FG-PLIB  to FG-OSG ,  
I ever had   about 20% less performance   with OSG.

I am running FG on  AMD ATHLON 3200 (32 bit) with AGP  mothercard.

May be OSG is more accurate with modern (recent) CPU. (i must test it).


Cheers


-- 
Gérard
http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/


-
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel


Re: [Flightgear-devel] CVS - Frame Rates under Windows XP

2008-03-31 Thread Heiko Schulz


 
 AND, with Linux and the same Graphics Card 7800 GS  
 512 MB, i can notice the 
 same decrease of performance from FG-PLIB  to FG-OSG
 ,  
 I ever had   about 20% less performance   with OSG.
 
 I am running FG on  AMD ATHLON 3200 (32 bit) with
 AGP  mothercard.
 
 May be OSG is more accurate with modern (recent)
 CPU. (i must test it).
 
 
 Cheers
 
 
 -- 
I notice a difference between OSG and Plib too- but
this is known!
But we can discuss and find out, how to make it
faster- time for Tim to answer!

still in work: http://www.hoerbird.net/galerie.html
But already done: http://www.hoerbird.net/reisen.html


  Lesen Sie Ihre E-Mails jetzt einfach von unterwegs.
www.yahoo.de/go

-
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel


Re: [Flightgear-devel] CVS - Frame Rates under Windows XP

2008-03-31 Thread Heiko Schulz

 CoreDuo 2,6 Ghz and a Gainward 8800GT. Not surprised
 it runs well!!! 

If you read carefully, I said that even on my old pc
there wasn't any trouble!

In particular I think the CoreDuo does threading
better
 than the P4. In case
 you haven't noticed, the 7600gs is coping easily
 with the output from FG-OSG
 - that's why the frame rates didn't increase. 
 
 And what would Vsync do? The frame rate never gets
 anywhere near the point
 at which it might operate.

Really? 
I don't believe that if I look at your PC - it is
better than my old one 
 
 I've tried
 frame-rate-throttle - it just makes it
 worse. The graphics are absolutely no different here
 between OSG or plib
 that I can see, and why should they be? 

You are the first and only one yet having problems
with that- the kids in our kids corner havn't this
problem yet.

 Could we have some _real_ numbers to compare instead
 of hearsay.
 
 This is not a OSG versus plib discussion - it's a
 why OSG is so poor on XP
 discussion
 
It isn't poor on XP-
I had framerates about 25-37 on my old 2.8HG single
core and Nvidea FX5200 - with the tree shader I had
about 17-25fps- absolut usuable.
(KSFO, 28R, Noon, 1024x768, all boxes are checked)
Note: the FX5200 is the lowest card.

And: Windows XP needs a lot of perfomance - linux not!
And that's the fact why a lot of things are running
faster on Linux systems!

But we can always talk about how to make FGFS faster!

 

I think you have to check your pc first- 

still in work: http://www.hoerbird.net/galerie.html
But already done: http://www.hoerbird.net/reisen.html


  Machen Sie Yahoo! zu Ihrer Startseite. Los geht's: 
http://de.yahoo.com/set

-
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel


Re: [Flightgear-devel] CVS - Frame Rates under Windows XP

2008-03-31 Thread Csaba Halász
On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 8:43 PM, Vivian Meazza
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 I've tried both executables generated here using
 MSVC8, and Fred's pre-cooked binaries. So far as I can see the results are
 identical.

Here is a mingw32 build made with gcc 4.3.0 if you want to give it a try:
http://www.youshare.com/view.php?file=fg-mingw.zip

I can only say it starts and the menu works (tested using a virtual
machine through remote desktop :)
No warranties, might have left out a dozen files from the archive...

-- 
Csaba/Jester

-
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel