Survey: Do You Support Framebuffers and/or Non-Po2 [RERUN]

General discussion about LÖVE, Lua, game development, puns, and unicorns.

After completing the test, what does the "You Support: ..." text say? (excluding FB sizes)

Nothing
7
10%
Framebuffers
2
3%
Framebuffers, Non-Po2 Framebuffers
0
No votes
Framebuffers, Non-Po2 Images
1
1%
Framebuffers, Non-Po2 Framebuffers, Non-Po2 Images
52
75%
Non-Po2 Images
7
10%
 
Total votes: 69

User avatar
BarnD
Prole
Posts: 49
Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 1:23 pm
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Survey: Do You Support Framebuffers and/or Non-Po2 [RERU

Post by BarnD » Thu Apr 28, 2011 10:25 am

BlackBulletIV wrote:EDIT: Oh wait! Of course nothing happens! You guys don't support framebuffers, and the code is set to do nothing. However it should give a "thanks" message... I'll have to fix that sometime soon.
lol, I thought you would of known that.. Cause I know I did. :rofl:

User avatar
Adamantos
Prole
Posts: 27
Joined: Sun May 16, 2010 10:47 pm

Re: Survey: Do You Support Framebuffers and/or Non-Po2 [RERU

Post by Adamantos » Thu Apr 28, 2011 10:35 am

Nice idea !

my specs are:
Fujitsu Laptop Esprimo Mobile
Intel Core2 Duo @ 2.53GHz
3GB Ram
Mobile Intel 4 Series Express GFx (onboard, shared memory)

Results from Test:
Framebuffers NonPO2, Images NonPO2
max Size 4096x4096 - 3x 2187x2187

User avatar
sharpobject
Prole
Posts: 44
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2011 2:32 pm
Location: California
Contact:

Re: Survey: Do You Support Framebuffers and/or Non-Po2 [RERU

Post by sharpobject » Thu Apr 28, 2011 10:37 am

The test for large framebuffers causes love 0.7.1 to crash under OSX 10.6.7.

User avatar
BlackBulletIV
Inner party member
Posts: 1261
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2010 8:19 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia
Contact:

Re: Survey: Do You Support Framebuffers and/or Non-Po2 [RERU

Post by BlackBulletIV » Thu Apr 28, 2011 10:47 am

Thanks guys.
sharpobject wrote:The test for large framebuffers causes love 0.7.1 to crash under OSX 10.6.7.
Argh. For now, just don't hit space. What are your results then?

User avatar
sharpobject
Prole
Posts: 44
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2011 2:32 pm
Location: California
Contact:

Re: Survey: Do You Support Framebuffers and/or Non-Po2 [RERU

Post by sharpobject » Thu Apr 28, 2011 10:58 am

Everything else works. Voted appropriately.

Machine: MacBookPro7,1 with OSX 10.6.7
CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo 2.4GHz
Memory: 4 GB DDR3
Graphics: NVIDIA GeForce 320M 256 MB

User avatar
Taehl
Dreaming in associative arrays
Posts: 1024
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 5:07 am
Location: CA, USA
Contact:

Re: Survey: Do You Support Framebuffers and/or Non-Po2 [RERU

Post by Taehl » Thu Apr 28, 2011 11:58 am

Framebuffers, Non-Po2 framebuffers, Non-Po2 Images
Framebuffers up to the size of 16384 x 16384 (holy crap!)
Po3 framebuffers up to the size of 6561 x 6561

Machine: Windows 7 Pro x64
CPU: AMD Athlon 64 x2 6000+
Memory: 4 gigs DDR2
Graphics: Nvidia GTS 250 with 1 gig GDDR3
Earliest Love2D supporter who can't Love anymore. Let me disable pixel shaders if I don't use them, dammit!
Lenovo Thinkpad X60 Tablet, built like a tank. But not fancy enough for Love2D 0.10.0+.

User avatar
Lafolie
Inner party member
Posts: 805
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 2:59 pm
Location: SR388
Contact:

Re: Survey: Do You Support Framebuffers and/or Non-Po2 [RERU

Post by Lafolie » Thu Apr 28, 2011 12:30 pm

Taehl wrote:Framebuffers, Non-Po2 framebuffers, Non-Po2 Images
Framebuffers up to the size of 16384 x 16384 (holy crap!)
Po3 framebuffers up to the size of 6561 x 6561
It seems to me that RAM plays a large part in the framebuffers' maximum size. Not surprising, but goddamn, are you sure that's right?! Even with 1GB VRAM, that's huuuuuuuge.
Do you recognise when the world won't stop for you? Or when the days don't care what you've got to do? When the weight's too tough to lift up, what do you? Don't let them choose for you, that's on you.

User avatar
Taehl
Dreaming in associative arrays
Posts: 1024
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 5:07 am
Location: CA, USA
Contact:

Re: Survey: Do You Support Framebuffers and/or Non-Po2 [RERU

Post by Taehl » Thu Apr 28, 2011 12:52 pm

That's exactly what the test told me. Either the test has a bug, or else Nvidia pulled off something amazing with their 200 series (besides just being great cards in general).

EDIT) Huh... Doing the math gives something interesting:
16384 * 16384 (claimed framebuffer texture size) * 4 (4 bytes per pixel (BGRA)) = 1,073,741,824 bytes
1024 ^ 3 (a gigabyte) = 1,073,741,824 bytes
Earliest Love2D supporter who can't Love anymore. Let me disable pixel shaders if I don't use them, dammit!
Lenovo Thinkpad X60 Tablet, built like a tank. But not fancy enough for Love2D 0.10.0+.

User avatar
Lafolie
Inner party member
Posts: 805
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 2:59 pm
Location: SR388
Contact:

Re: Survey: Do You Support Framebuffers and/or Non-Po2 [RERU

Post by Lafolie » Thu Apr 28, 2011 2:05 pm

No way... as if it maxed out like that. Wow.
Do you recognise when the world won't stop for you? Or when the days don't care what you've got to do? When the weight's too tough to lift up, what do you? Don't let them choose for you, that's on you.

User avatar
kalle2990
Party member
Posts: 245
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2009 1:17 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Survey: Do You Support Framebuffers and/or Non-Po2 [RERU

Post by kalle2990 » Thu Apr 28, 2011 5:16 pm

This is what I got with my Radeon HD 5870:
Result wrote:Framebuffers
Non-Po2 Framebuffers
Non-Po2 Images
Framebuffers up to the size 32768 x 32768
Power of 3 Framebuffers up to the size 19683 x 19683

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 41 guests