> When benchmarking DirectFB, I found that a typical software alpha
> blending rectangle fill is completely dominated (I'm talking 90% of the
> CPU cycles here) by the time it takes to read pixels from the
> framebuffer.
Note the SOFTWARE alpha blending rectangle fill. You are passing alot of
> When benchmarking DirectFB, I found that a typical software alpha
> blending rectangle fill is completely dominated (I'm talking 90% of the
> CPU cycles here) by the time it takes to read pixels from the
> framebuffer.
I would expect that. Guess why X11 is designed not to do this.
> The
When benchmarking DirectFB, I found that a typical software alpha
blending rectangle fill is completely dominated (I'm talking 90% of the
CPU cycles here) by the time it takes to read pixels from the
framebuffer.
I would expect that. Guess why X11 is designed not to do this.
The pixels are
When benchmarking DirectFB, I found that a typical software alpha
blending rectangle fill is completely dominated (I'm talking 90% of the
CPU cycles here) by the time it takes to read pixels from the
framebuffer.
Note the SOFTWARE alpha blending rectangle fill. You are passing alot of
data
When benchmarking DirectFB, I found that a typical software alpha
blending rectangle fill is completely dominated (I'm talking 90% of the
CPU cycles here) by the time it takes to read pixels from the
framebuffer.
The pixels are read linearly in chunks of aligned 32-bit words. It's a
Geforce 2
When benchmarking DirectFB, I found that a typical software alpha
blending rectangle fill is completely dominated (I'm talking 90% of the
CPU cycles here) by the time it takes to read pixels from the
framebuffer.
The pixels are read linearly in chunks of aligned 32-bit words. It's a
Geforce 2
6 matches
Mail list logo
