4 ms·

I wonder how the GPU version is implemented. One quad and one texture draw per glyph sounds very not scalable, but one quad per terminal, one texture atlas and

• henning 1y ago
  One quad per glyph is very scalable, especially if you use instanced rendering. Each quad is just reading from a single texture atlas. GPUs are beastly blitting machines. Runs at ~1500 FPS with a 6K screen of full text on my machine even when text is being updated at about the pace of a 150 WPM typist but you only update quads that strictly need to change and store font metrics on the GPU in a buffer. A full screen refresh where you send quad data for 750 Lorem ipsum paragraphs every frame runs at 300 FPS on my hardware.
• Snild 1y ago
  A terminal maximized on my screen says: ~$ echo $((2 * LINES * COLUMNS)) triangles 34272 triangles That's nothing for a modern GPU. For example, this benchmark[1] says to expect on the order of 10-800 million tri/s. At the low end of that, you'd have a frame time of 3.427ms -- 292 fps. The original Playstation could do 180 000 textured polygons per second[2], so it could've managed ~5 fps. Of course, you wouldn't render that many chars at its available output resolutions anyway. :) [1] https://github.com/ctsilva/triangle-rendering-benchmarks#:~:text=Expected%20Performance%20Ranges https://github.com/ctsilva/triangle-rendering-benchmarks#:~:... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_technical_specifications#:~:text=180,000%20with%20texture%20mapping https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_technical_specific...
  • jayd16 1y ago
    But if they naively execute 15120 draw calls...
    • samdoesnothing 1y ago
      Same texture so a single draw call probably?