[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Performance (was: [Re: [OpenGL client (was Re: Re: Pro
[Top] [All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
On 2 Feb 2000, * wrote:
> I mentioned in the previous mail about performance issues. The main issues
> are:
>
> 1) due to the nature of openGL and 3d, most people will be unable to run it
> full screen with a framerate high enough to support animation, and as of yet I
> know of no way to do localized animations with OpenGL/glut.
You mean, presumably, most people without hardware acceleration. Bear in
mind that it is now nearly impossible to buy machines without 3D
acceleration built-in.
My crappy old K5-200 can struggle through quake v1 at about 20fps because
it has a voodoo2. And that has animation.
So I suggest, make animation an option, and ppl without hardware acc leave
it off.
>
> 2) The big issue, the number of polygons. Its obvious that we'll want more
> than one polygon per terrain square, as a general rule ;) In fact, for a
> realistic mountain square, for example, you'd probably want at least 5x5 (25
> squares, 50 triangles). On a reasonable map of, say, 600 squares with only 20
> triangles per terrain, thats 12,000 triangular polygons. Which is 48 megs of
> ram to store just the shape. Which is a bad thing ;)
Sure. But how many of those squares really need 20 triangles? Most
squares need 2, surely? And make the high detail an option? And also, why
is it 4K per triangle in the map? That seems a lot.
Jules
/----------------+-------------------------------+---------------------\
| Jelibean aka | jules@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx | 6 Evelyn Rd |
| Jules aka | jules@xxxxxxxxxx | Richmond, Surrey |
| Julian Bean | jmlb2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx | TW9 2TF *UK* |
+----------------+-------------------------------+---------------------+
| War doesn't demonstrate who's right... just who's left. |
| When privacy is outlawed... only the outlaws have privacy. |
\----------------------------------------------------------------------/
|
|
