[SDL] Question about texture size

David Olofson david.olofson at reologica.se
Fri Jul 5 05:46:01 PDT 2002


On Thu, 04/07/2002 22:06:02 , Martijn Melenhorst (Prive) <rheenen at home.nl> wrote:
> Ofcourse relying on any texture size is something you *need* to do,
> even if it's 32x32 pixels.

Of course - that's not really what I meant. (Although it's kind of
cool to fake a max texture size of 32x32 and still have the code
work properly. :-)


> My question concerned *what* texture 
> size to depend on, then, since the relevance can not be avoided.

256x256. IIRC, it's a requirement for OpenGL compliance.


> Strange, by the way, that the G400 would not have hard times with
> this, because my GeForce 2 card sure does slow down if I keep
> switching textures for every blit. Not that this is something
> that I'd normally do, but it proves that it does cause a
> slowdown...

Yeah, one would have thought that nVidia should have faster
drivers and/or hardware... Either nVidia somehow optimizes the
general case at the expense of texture switches, or Matrox is
doing something stupid that makes the G400 driver hit the
texture binding overhead for every polygon, whether you change
the texture or not. Or it's just some very interesting bug in
my code! :-)

My benchmark results were weird enough that I should really try to
find out what actually happened.


//David


.---------------------------------------
| David Olofson
| Programmer
| david.olofson at reologica.se
|---------------------------------------
| Address:
| REOLOGICA Instruments AB
| Scheelevägen 30
| 223 63 LUND
| Sweden
|---------------------------------------
| Phone: 046-12 77 60
| Fax: 046-12 50 57
| Mobil: 
| E-mail: david.olofson at reologica.se
| WWW: http://www.reologica.se
| 
`-----> We Make Rheology Real





More information about the SDL mailing list