[PD] problem with GEM 0.90 on win2k
IOhannes m zmoelnig
zmoelnig at iem.at
Thu Jul 1 08:19:10 CEST 2004
chris clepper wrote:
> On Jun 30, 2004, at 4:28 PM, rainer _ wrote:
>>>> what does incredibly slow mean to you:
>> not even heavy videoprocessing, just playing back a uncompressed avi
the question was rather: do the problems occur in pix_ objects (or in
conjunction with them) or not.
and are there performance issues when *only* using openGL (no pix at all)?
> Uncompressed video can easily be hard disk limited. A single stream on
> a single 7200rpm IDE drive is fine, but more than that requires
but this wouldn't explain why it runs on gem-0.87...
> Perhaps the problem is texturing related. I don't think GEM does
> rectangle texturing on Windows so each frame uploads 1024x1024 frames
> which eats bandwidth. I'm not sure what the state of DMA texturing is
> either, but maybe it can be forced through the drivers.
unfortunately i really don't know what the actual gem-0.90.0-build for
windows has been.
i have definitely done one windos-build with rectangle-textures enabled
(for supported hw, like nvidia), and i do believe it is the one that i
have put online.
but probably it is a good idea to send [mode 1/0( messages to the
[pix_texture] (turning on/off rectangle textures) to see if something
> Maybe you are sending 50,000 emails an hour? Or perhaps video playback
> triggers all the spyware logging?
>> maybe it has something to do with the glut libs??
> Unless you are making excessive use of the teapot then GLUT won't even
> be called.
GLUT will never be called in 0.90 as it has been completely removed (the
teapot-code has been copied to solve the problem with rectangle-textures...)
More information about the Pd-list