[PD] scaling pix_draw in GEM ,and GEM performance question

Mark Danks mdanks at Stormfront.com
Tue Sep 10 18:32:53 CEST 2002

  pix_draw blits the image data directly to the screen, so you are correct,
pix_scale will not have any effect (since it only works on geometry data,
like triangles).

  In theory with any modern day gfx card, pix_texture should always be
faster than pix_draw (there are a couple of edge cases, but I don't think
that you are dealing with them).  I used to get 4 mpeg streams on a 400Mhz
box with a TNT easily.  I suspect that more RAM will help though.

Later, Mark

= mdanks at stormfront.com
= Technical Director PS2/XBox
= http://www.danks.org/mark

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim Ruxton [mailto:cinetron at passport.ca]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 1:06 AM
> To: pd-list at iem.kug.ac.at
> Subject: [PD] scaling pix_draw in GEM ,and GEM performance question
> Hi,
> I am having trouble scaling images using pix_draw. I thought I could 
> scale an image using scale or scaleXYZ before pix_draw but it 
> seems like 
> these objects   have no effect. I can scale an image by 
> texture mapping 
> onto a square and resizing it but I find it is slower than 
> pix_draw in 
> this case. When rendering movies I've found  that texture mapping is 
> faster but the image is more distorted. I'm using GEM 0.87 
> under Linux. 
> Is this a problem with pix_draw or is it supposed to work this way? I 
> have a fast processor ( 1 GHz) a good video card (Nvidia 2Go) 
> and I find 
> movies are playing  quite slowly. I only have 128 MB ram. 
> Just ordered 
> another 256 MB hoping this will speed things up. Wondering what other 
> people are using to get realtime playback with MPEGs in Linux?
> Thanks,
> Jim
> _______________________________________________
> PD-list mailing list
> PD-list at iem.kug.ac.at
> http://iem.kug.ac.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list

More information about the Pd-list mailing list