Re: Just saying hello :)
Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 5:53 pm
It's cool looking , but the performance is, like you say, completely awful. I'll experiment a little with your tiles and get back to you ...
Not funny. Elegant rather. Nice job on getting something done. I hope you don't have Nethack #4932 planned thoughEthnar wrote:I must admit I got confused by you, qubodup, as well. Guess you just found it funny that my post has letter-like structure.
Code: Select all
FPS | Your machine | My machine --------------------------------------------- Your test | 1429 | 119 GEE | 90 | 30
So..rude wrote:600 blocks? That many? What is the dimensions of the map? And what do you mean by completely omitted? Not even iterated?
Code: Select all
/|\ -+- \|/
Interesting lecture, it's nice to learn something that is both, new and obvious.That FPS is a little low, then again, FPS is a really poor metric for game performance.
Yup, LÖVE is pretty baddass. And sadly, even thou I just love the simplicity and structure of this engine, I have to give it up. Guess my project isn't that little and I'm having pretty big expectations. But it was really interesting experience and I know what platform I'll use if I ever need to quickly write something smaller.I just did a basic performance test now, and I'm a little surprised. On my main machine (2ghz AMD, nvidia 7950GTX), LOVE could draw 4000+ rotated/scaled tiles @ 60 FPS.
On my laptop (2ghz AMD, ATI X1250), which is similar to your machine, the same code ran at just below ~60 FPS for only 100 rotated/scaled tiles! Seems more GPU-bound than I expected. I guess Lua is pretty badass. If this is similar to the performance of your computer, though, it's no wonder you get 30 FPS when drawing 600 tiles.
You can't up performance further until we have vertex buffers in LÖVE, or some specialized map object written in C. And I wouldn't wait on that. That will take a while.
Thanks for info.Single indexed array: I don't really know about this. You only have to create one table this way, but you still need nested loops, so I guess it only matters memory wise.
Disabling scaling/rotation will not change performance much, and is not possible anyway.