0.7 is very slower

cmoibenlepro · Post by **cmoibenlepro** » Sat Sep 11, 2004 5:10 pm

I downloaded irrlicht 0.7 and I can see that it is unfortunately MUCH slower than 0.6

Also it looks worse (like there were a lot of pixel that flash on the textures)

I tried both directx8,9 and opengl and there is a difference in all them.

here is screenshots (from the techdemo):
http://zeldapod.freeunixhost.com/pivot/entry.php?id=8

my computer specs are:
pentiumIII 1ghz
256mb ram
geforce2 64mb
winXP SP2

Jedive · Post by **Jedive** » Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:41 pm

It is not slower for me. About the graphical quality, it seems that mip mapping is mising in D3D9 renderer, works ok for me in D3D8 and OGL.

cmoibenlepro · Post by **cmoibenlepro** » Sat Sep 11, 2004 9:55 pm

I updated my screenshots. It shows now also the bugs in the OpenGL version.

nitroman · Post by **nitroman** » Sun Sep 12, 2004 4:07 am

I will wait irrlicht 0.7.1

cmoibenlepro · Post by **cmoibenlepro** » Sun Sep 12, 2004 5:38 am

I found something:
The slowdown is NOT caused by irrlicht 0.7 dll , the problem is in the examples and the techdemo.

I tried to compile the quake3map and collision examples from irrlicht 0.6 with the 0.7 lib and run them with the 0.7 dll , and they look the same as before
(same speed, same look)

but the quakemap and collision examples located in the irrlicht 0.7 "bin" folder look the same as the bad screenshots I posted for the techdemo.

(ugly far away textures that look very pixelated, like if there was no blur, and this effect looks worse when the camera is moving,
also the speed in those examples is slower than those from 0.6... strange)

I didn't look the source yet, but Niko what did you changed in the examples???

Hope it helps.

niko · Post by **niko** » Sun Sep 12, 2004 8:12 am

Hm, wow strange. There seems to be a bug in the OGL driver. I on my PCs it looked quite ok..
I think the speed problem is because of the (wrongly) disabled mipmapping, but I don't know what causes this.

Peter Müller · Post by **Peter Müller** » Sun Sep 12, 2004 10:17 am

Looks like Spheremap is activated

Tyn · Post by **Tyn** » Sun Sep 12, 2004 10:25 am

I can confirm that I had the same problem as the last screenshot. I made a spheremap for one node in OGL and it for some reason reflects that to every other node around it. No problems with DX 8 or 9 with that tho.

I can't say that I think it is slower either, my project now runs much smoother with VSync enabled ( or at least it seems to ) with both Photoshop, 3DSM and MSVC running. Anyone who has run those three programs at the same time will know what kind of drain we are talking about on the system resources and yet it still runs smooth, something which didn't happen in 0.6, so I at least am happy.

Electron · Post by **Electron** » Sun Sep 12, 2004 12:21 pm

Speed has seemed about the same to me.

cmoibenlepro · Post by **cmoibenlepro** » Sun Sep 12, 2004 4:43 pm

I think the speed problem is because of the (wrongly) disabled mipmapping

humm... sorry what is mipmapping?

afecelis · Post by **afecelis** » Sun Sep 12, 2004 5:05 pm

@cmoibelenpro: here's an explanation on mipmapping:
http://www.3drender.com/glossary/mipmapping.htm

@all:
there's a good discussion and a fix to the spheremapping problem here:
http://irrlicht.sourceforge.net/phpBB2/ ... php?t=3762

it seems that some OpenGL features were left out in some classes.Here's the file, download it and recompile.
http://www.danielpatton.com/afecelis/sr ... Renderer.h

cmoibenlepro · Post by **cmoibenlepro** » Sun Sep 12, 2004 6:29 pm

I made some more tests.

The mipmapping missing is only in directx9.
I'm sure it is what is causing slowdown.
finally directx8 just looks normal as before and it is fast enough (I get more than 110 fps in the techdemo like in 0.6).
Also I read somewhere that winXP SP2 is slower because it takes more computer ressources. So it might be an explanation why I get lower fps results that what I remembered. So there is no real slowdown or bugs from 0.6 to 0.7 with the directx8 renderer.

but directx9 is a LOT slower than before
(finally the I found the difference between the quakemap 0.6 and 0.7 when I compiled them with lib 0.7 ..... 0.6 was using directx8 and 0.7 was using directx9

my mistake)

so, what will need to be fixed for irrlicht 0.7.1:
-OpenGL bug (it seems electron fixed it, but I didn't test it)
-Directx9 mipmapping bug

BTW, afecelis copy the irrlicht0.7 include and lib files to VisualC++Toolkit folder (at the place of the old ones) and Relo continue to work as well as it did before

afecelis · Post by **afecelis** » Sun Sep 12, 2004 7:18 pm

thnx cmoibelenpro, already did! I got everything up and running with Relo, including compiling the dll. I was reading at the MS VCtoolkit site that the compiler includes the same version as the professional. That's why the exes and the dll are so optimized (besides the options used in the compiling process). They're even smaller than the ones I get compiling with VC7 .net 2003 standard version.

Try Electron's fix. Niko already looked at it and it's working fine!

cya around!

ps. The only thing I had to fix in Relo were the paths to the include folders since I use the Irrlicht/source/include instead of the Irrlicht/include one, so now it's Irrlicht/source/Irrlicht/include, since there's a separate source for the .net version.
ps1. I'm not copying the include folders to the toolkit, only the lib files since Relo's bug is only with lib files. The include folders work fine when set up from the ini file or includeing them in your project's options.

cheers!

cmoibenlepro (not logged) · Sun Sep 12, 2004 8:01 pm

I tried both directx8,9 and opengl and there is a difference in all them

I've made some more tests:

I found why I first tought that directx8 also was slow:
it is caused by the "vertical synchronisation" option...

BTW, I've made some benchmark:

Directx8:
with synchronisation: 59-60 fps
without: 80-145 fps (a lot faster)

directx9:
with syn: 29-59 fps
without: 29-85 fps (not a big difference, but much slower than directx8)

opengl
with syn: 55-60 fps
without:75-138 fps
(both are buggy... I didn't try electron patch yet)

Hope it helps.

afecelis · Post by **afecelis** » Sun Sep 12, 2004 9:56 pm

btw, cmoibelenpro: remember the particle editor I sent you? Make a backup of it and compile the project in Irr0.7, the project will compile fine but none of the sliders will work to make the particles change in realtime.

give it a try and let me know.

slider stuff changed in 0.7?