Part of the Khronos Group
OpenGL.org

The Industry's Foundation for High Performance Graphics

from games to virtual reality, mobile phones to supercomputers

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12

Thread: render to depth texture rectangle slower than copy tex sub image

  1. #1
    Junior Member Regular Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    102

    render to depth texture rectangle slower than copy tex sub image

    Hi ive tried to switch over the shadow rendering to use render to depth texture rectangle but rendering to texture still seems orders of magnitude slower than copytexsubimage. The difference in framerate is something like 30fps with copytexsubimage, and 5fps render to texture. Does anyone have any ideas why this might be?

  2. #2
    Senior Member OpenGL Pro
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    1,594

    Re: render to depth texture rectangle slower than copy tex sub image

    because nvidia drivers implemented rendertotexture crappy. but, according to cass, it should change in the next release.. i hope (and bet ) its true. wish us all the best

    (oh, and i hope rendertotexture stops to be buggy as well )
    http://davepermen.net - if i could stay true to my heart, i would feel totally free

  3. #3
    Junior Member Regular Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    102

    Re: render to depth texture rectangle slower than copy tex sub image

    Does that mean the beta 40.71's as well?

  4. #4
    Member Regular Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Austria
    Posts
    280

    Re: render to depth texture rectangle slower than copy tex sub image

    XEngine - The Platform- and API-Independent 3D Engine
    with Programmable Pipeline Support: [URL=http://xengine.sourceforge.net
    My]http://xengine.sourceforge.net

  5. #5
    Junior Member Regular Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    102

    Re: render to depth texture rectangle slower than copy tex sub image

    Thanks Asgard. I guess that thread was just a couple days ago so maybe if we are lucky we can see fast (like it is in d3d) RTT (or RTT Rectangle) in 1 - 2 weeks.

  6. #6
    Super Moderator OpenGL Guru
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Posts
    4,256

    Re: render to depth texture rectangle slower than copy tex sub image

    Is this problem only on nvidia cards. Never mind very old cards that don't support multitexturing and cubemapping, and such.

    V-man
    ------------------------------
    Sig: http://glhlib.sourceforge.net
    an open source GLU replacement library. Much more modern than GLU.
    float matrix[16], inverse_matrix[16];
    glhLoadIdentityf2(matrix);
    glhTranslatef2(matrix, 0.0, 0.0, 5.0);
    glhRotateAboutXf2(matrix, angleInRadians);
    glhScalef2(matrix, 1.0, 1.0, -1.0);
    glhQuickInvertMatrixf2(matrix, inverse_matrix);
    glUniformMatrix4fv(uniformLocation1, 1, FALSE, matrix);
    glUniformMatrix4fv(uniformLocation2, 1, FALSE, inverse_matrix);

  7. #7
    Senior Member OpenGL Guru Humus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    2,345

    Re: render to depth texture rectangle slower than copy tex sub image

    Originally posted by V-man:
    Is this problem only on nvidia cards.
    AFAIK, yes. At least on Radeon series cards it's very fast. For instance do my "Shadows that don't suck" demo run at like 4x as high framerate on a R8500 than a GF3.

  8. #8
    Super Moderator OpenGL Guru
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Posts
    4,256

    Re: render to depth texture rectangle slower than copy tex sub image

    Originally posted by Humus:
    AFAIK, yes. At least on Radeon series cards it's very fast. For instance do my "Shadows that don't suck" demo run at like 4x as high framerate on a R8500 than a GF3.
    Unfortunatly, I dont have access to any Radeon series cards.

    Can you tell me if it's actually faster than plain vanilla copysubtex or ....

    It should be in principal.

    V-man
    ------------------------------
    Sig: http://glhlib.sourceforge.net
    an open source GLU replacement library. Much more modern than GLU.
    float matrix[16], inverse_matrix[16];
    glhLoadIdentityf2(matrix);
    glhTranslatef2(matrix, 0.0, 0.0, 5.0);
    glhRotateAboutXf2(matrix, angleInRadians);
    glhScalef2(matrix, 1.0, 1.0, -1.0);
    glhQuickInvertMatrixf2(matrix, inverse_matrix);
    glUniformMatrix4fv(uniformLocation1, 1, FALSE, matrix);
    glUniformMatrix4fv(uniformLocation2, 1, FALSE, inverse_matrix);

  9. #9
    Junior Member Regular Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    102

    Re: render to depth texture rectangle slower than copy tex sub image

    Hey humus what extensions are you using in "shadows don't suck", on the ati website http://www.ati.com/developer/sdk/rad...fo/Prog3D.html it doesn't have any shadow extensions there. Is the page just out of date?

  10. #10
    Member Regular Contributor
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Beloit, Wisconsin
    Posts
    473

    Re: render to depth texture rectangle slower than copy tex sub image

    Originally posted by Humus:
    AFAIK, yes. At least on Radeon series cards it's very fast. For instance do my "Shadows that don't suck" demo run at like 4x as high framerate on a R8500 than a GF3.
    Yeah, it's faster, but it's not with out it's own problems unfortantly (like the cull face was wrong at one point, but I think that fixed now).

    BTW, when is your site going to be back up?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •