-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Paul Surgeon schrieb: > On Sunday 15 January 2006 12:08, Christian Mayer wrote: >> (*) unless you want to get fancy with blending the textures, etc. pp. >> But this will create an big overhead. > > Well yes but a half decent scenery engine using texture blending like the one > in X-Plane and MSFS would do just fine and they actually run faster than FG > when I increase the visibility to about 50km or greater. > > We must be doing something wrong to get the worst of both worlds.
Have you compared the frame rates when everything apart from the ground is disabled (no other planes and no objects on the ground)? Is the resolution the same (IIRC FGFS has a resolution of 30 or 40 meters)? Does X-Plane or MSFS use a CLOD algorithm or are they tile based (do those tiles have LOD or not)? If we know the answers to those questions are the same for FGFS and the other simes we can try to compare texture blending vs. not texture blending. CU, Christian ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
