On Tuesday 14 June 2011 16:15:35 Henri Verbeet wrote:
> Yes, but I think that by now GF7 GPUs are marginal enough that it's
> not worth keeping the code around for. The Steam HW survey for example
> reports over 90% D3D10+ cards. Even if it does regress something, I
> think it makes more sense to t
On 14 June 2011 15:26, Stefan Dösinger wrote:
>> As far as I'm concerned you can just submit this. I was going to do
>> this myself, looks like you got there first.
> Still didn't get around to test this on geforce 7 GPUs. It's possible that the
> bug this was supposed to fix is still around.
>
Ye
Hi,
Thanks for the comments, I've some replies inlined below. The bigger concern I
have is that the patches don't improvement by a lot yet, about 1% on AMD GPUs
and 1.5% to 2.5% on Nvidia GPUs(in real apps, my benchmarks are a different
issue). Because of that my plan is to do more testing and
I only looked over about half of this, doesn't look too crazy. You do
have trailing spaces in a couple of places though. Here are some
comments:
> Subject: [PATCH 04/14] wined3d: Don't set FBO attachment filtering to
> GL_NEAREST
As far as I'm concerned you can just submit this. I was going to do
2011/6/6 Stefan Dösinger :
...
> Furthermore, Matteo says that not calling context_apply_draw_buffers every
> time framebuffer() is run is a noticeable performance improvement too. Matteo,
> did you test this with just patch 0005, or both 0005 and 0006?
>
Actually that was with your FBO dirty pat
Hi,
This is intended mostly for the other d3d developers, but since we have quite
a number of them now so individual CCs are a lot of work :-)
I attached the patches I currently have in my tree to give an update on what
I've been working on recently. The main aim of those patches is to reduce dr
