Good call... On the iterated mesh example I posted fps is totally different (n/a in the Viewer, and around 5fps using the patch). I usually used to think the Viewer was more accurate, but in this case (iterated OpenCL mesh), I think the fps display reflects something closer to reality.
Going back through the other examples with the fps display patch, things are basically consistent whichever I use (the fps patch or the Viewer both reflect similar performance decreases).
-George Toledo
Ive also noticed the FPS patch can offer very different results compared to what the FPS in the viewer reads. Not sure which to trust, but it seem like the viewer gives me more believable results to my eye.
On Nov 4, 2009, at 5:38 PM, George Toledo wrote:
On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 5:15 PM, Christopher Wright
<email@hidden> wrote:
Another test case that yields somewhat different results:
<2000lines.qtz>
Well, if you want to really get miffed, check this out (OpenCL Mesh iteration). I don't even get an fps reading on it, though changing iteration amounts obviously changes the apparent visual speed in the Viewer. Really odd. I can crank this thing up so that things even get a bit non responsive (I don't want to push into a freeze), and I still won't get an fps reading.
-George Toledo
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Quartzcomposer-dev mailing list (
email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Quartzcomposer-dev mailing list (
email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Quartzcomposer-dev mailing list (
email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
