Bouncy has a lot more collision interaction going on than tunnel does. Also it uses "dumb" GL_POINTS to draw, which can be pretty slow. Disabling the bumper collisions (comment out line 81) seems to help performance a lot with larger number of particles. So presently lepton is not as fast as I'd like when you have lots of particles interacting with multiple domains. If that's something you really need, you may be able to convince me to prioritize it 8^)
-Casey On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 11:52 PM, mclovin<[email protected]> wrote: > > I tried out lepton, and went through some of your examples. Bouncy.py > is mainly what I needed (colorful balls at about 10px wide), but was > dissappointed at the low framerate: 22FPS at 1000 balls and at your > standard 100 balls it runs at a unsteady 40-47 FPS. with those few, i > would have expected a stable 60, if not 70 (vsync) FPS. which is odd > because the tunnel example seems to operate with many more particles. > so is there a reason bouncy.py is slow? > > On Aug 24, 12:15 am, Richard Jones <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 24/08/2009, at 3:04 PM, mclovin wrote: >> >> > I'll check that out. but I chose Rabbyt because it supposedly made >> > less ctypes calls so i was hoping that would help. Ill try out lepton >> > and see how much that helps. >> >> AFAIK Rabbyt works by creating GL display lists under the covers. If >> that's the case (it certainly was when the project started) then it's >> not really suited to particle engines either. >> >> Richard > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pyglet-users" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pyglet-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
