On 4/16/07, The Watermelon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > To list the advantages and disadvantages of them > > Smaller per-pie texture: > 1.faster opengl texcoords2f due to the reduced texture size(128x128 or > 3.might increase texture bind frequency because textures are no longer > shared between pies via 'page' > > Bigger texture page(enlarging exist texture pages) > 1.slower opengl texturing due to increased texture(256x256/512x512 to > 512x512/1024x1024) > 2.may not look as good as per-pie texture because the space allocated to > each pie is relatively small
I'm curious as to why you think the above points are valid. As far as I've heard, texture rebinding has a greater speed penalty than texture size, and why do we need to reduce the sprites to use larger texture pages? The actual size of the texture pages used in VRAM does *not* need to be the same as the texture pages saved on disk. We could rearrange them on load, as we do with the terrain tiles now. - Per _______________________________________________ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
