2 ms·
In GL it's quite easy to accidentially miss the "fast path" and get surprising slowdowns (and in reverse, GL can be surprisingly fast when hitting the fast path
by flohofwoe 3y ago
In GL it's quite easy to accidentially miss the "fast path" and get surprising slowdowns (and in reverse, GL can be surprisingly fast when hitting the fast path). What's disappointing though is that the Vulkan renderer only nearly reaches the same performance as the old GL renderer, this seems to indicate that the problem sits on the caller side of the 3D API.
It would probably have been a good idea to track performance throughout the implementation and iterate on that instead of "architectural purity".
- Vinnl 3y agoI don't understand half of the post, but claiming that they're doing this for "architectural purity" sounds ungenerous to me. The post lists a couple of tangible benefits, most of which do, I believe, relate to performance: > Proper color handling (including HDR) > Path rendering on the GPU > Possibly including glyph rendering > Off-the-main-thread rendering > Performance (on old and less powerful devices) (Which is not to say that tracking performance isn't a good idea. It's just that "architectural purity" sounds needlessly dismissive to me.)