<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="im">
<br></div><div class="im">
On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 1:59 AM, cyrille henry <<a href="mailto:ch@chnry.net" target="_blank">ch@chnry.net</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:ch@chnry.net" target="_blank">ch@chnry.net</a>>> wrote:<br>
<br>
hello,<br>
<br>
- try using a display list to render a sphere, so that every point don't have to be send for every sphere.<br>
see exemple 09.openGL/02.displaylist<br>
you can also use a model with a sphere.obj to have the same result.<br>
<br>
if the spheres are all moving at once, would a display list still help? Seems like recompilation would have to happen for every sphere for every frame? I haven't tried the model yet...<br>
<br>
</div></blockquote>
yes, the display list will help to render 1 single sphere.<br>
you have to call it 200 times.<br>
<br><br></blockquote><div>Ok I'm seeing a huge performance difference between using 200 of [sphere <size-doesn't-matter> 20] and [sphere <size-doesn't-matter> 30]. Huge. So if I want to keep the sphere with 30 points, I'm thinking gemlist or model are my answer. I'll try both and report back, unless you have a strong recommendation for one or the other to save me time.<br>
<br>This list is awesome. Where else could I find help like this? :-)<br><br>-John<br></div></div>