|
Does Allegro have software rendering? |
Timothy Graupmann
Member #2,546
July 2002
|
I have an ATI Rage PRO LT which I use for testing the lowest common denominator. Unforunately, in my current app that uses OpenGL I can only get 1-4 fps. I'm wondering if the 3D functions in AllegroGL use software rendering. I'm thinking I could get a speed improvement this way for lower end cards. |
X-G
Member #856
December 2000
|
The Allegro 3D functions are entirely software. However, even for low-end cards, hardware should be much faster. -- |
Carrus85
Member #2,633
August 2002
|
I doubt you will be able to get any speed improvement via software... all it does is taxes the CPU instead of the vid card... what good can come from that? Besides, Allegro's 3d software functions are slow as rock solid cold tar on a freezing winter day in hell...
|
Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
|
If you want software OGL, just install Mesa. -- |
Zaphos
Member #1,468
August 2001
|
The ATI Rage Pro absolutely HATES opengl; I believe that when testing a rotating textured cube example using that card, I got something along the lines of 15 fps (For reference, the same computer could run 3D games such as Thief II and Unreal Tournament at acceptable rates ... as well as anything else that used Direct3D). It is possible that software rendering in that specific case would be more effective. AllegroGL, however, does not to my knowledge use any software rendering. You'd have to use mesa for that, as TF said, or use Allegro's 3D functions (which would require basically a rewrite of your 3D code ... somehow I doubt that this is worth it) I think for the general case even the very low end cards these days should be able to handle opengl -- it's mainly just that one series of cards, and probably not worth any major engine work to support those cards.
|
Timothy Graupmann
Member #2,546
July 2002
|
Quote: The ATI Rage Pro absolutely HATES opengl; I believe that when testing a rotating textured cube example using that card, I got something along the lines of 15 fps (For reference, the same computer could run 3D games such as Thief II and Unreal Tournament at acceptable rates ... as well as anything else that used Direct3D). It is possible that software rendering in that specific case would be more effective. I've been wondering about that exactly. Unreal runs smoothly, but OpenGL can't do better than 2-4 fps drawing a simple (.3DS) animated model??? I'll have to give Mesa a try. It's not much of a rewrite. Just basic rotations, translations, and drawing primitives. |
Korval
Member #1,538
September 2001
|
Quote: Unreal runs smoothly Direct3D. |
Zaphos
Member #1,468
August 2001
|
Korval: That was the point.
|
Timothy Graupmann
Member #2,546
July 2002
|
I could use Direct3D, but I doubt that I will get a frame rate good enough to look smooth. Unreal Tournament with 3d acceleration runs slow for my gfx card, where software rendering isn't that choppy. |
Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
|
Yup. if you have a decent enough CPU, but your graphics card is what people call a 3D Decelerator, (aka: ATI Rage card ) then a software based engine will likely outperform the "accelerated" one. -- |
Korval
Member #1,538
September 2001
|
Quote: Unreal Tournament with 3d acceleration runs slow for my gfx card, where software rendering isn't that choppy. Then your lowest-common denominator isn't high enough for your application. Raise your standards or accept the low framerate. |
Timothy Graupmann
Member #2,546
July 2002
|
Quote: Then your lowest-common denominator isn't high enough for your application. Raise your standards or accept the low framerate. NEVER!!! I will only accept normal frame rates thru software rendering alternatives. |
Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
|
Tim: applauds I love your attitude -- |
Tobias Dammers
Member #2,604
August 2002
|
The ATI Rage Pro is NOT the only series of cards performing extremely bad with OpenGL. On my old machine, I have a Voodoo 1 card which gives similar results (OpenGL game: 2 fps / D3D game: 30 fps). I think that's because OpenGL was originally intended for high-end graphics applications (cad, rendering, simulations), while Direct3D was made for game programming. --- |
Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
|
With a Voodoo, even DX is probably dead slow compared to glide. -- |
Korval
Member #1,538
September 2001
|
Quote: I think that's because OpenGL was originally intended for high-end graphics applications You thought wrong. The reason your Voodoo1 doesn't work well with a full OpenGL implementation is that 3DFx didn't write a decent one. They didn't write a decent DX driver either. If you wanted decent speed out of a 3DFx card, you had to use Glide, which was 3DFx's API for rendering to a Glide card. |
HoopsMan
Member #1,943
February 2002
|
Tobias D. said: think that's because OpenGL was originally intended for high-end graphics applications (cad, rendering, simulations The point makes sense, SGI did create the original IrisGL for its own high-end workstations. |
|