GLUT-Doublebuffer on Windows 95

GLUT-Doublebuffer on Windows 95

Post by Michael I. Gol » Fri, 29 May 1998 04:00:00




> Hello!

> I am using GLUT to write OpenGL programs on Windows 95 with hardware
> acceleration (nVidia Riva 128).

> Now, whenever I use a Double Buffer in an animation, the frame rate
> seems to drop drastically. Has anyone else seen similar effects?

This is unusual - I would expect double-buffered code to run faster than
single-buffered.

Remember that the RIVA 128 has only 4 MB of VRAM, and your back buffer
and depth buffer must all fit in VRAM.  If your desktop is set to
1024x768x16, you can run in a window up to approximately 800x800.  If
your desktop is higher resolution your max window size is
correspondingly smaller.

Quote:> Might using WGL instead of GLUT solve the problem?

Not likely.

If you still have trouble with this, please send mail to

 
 
 

GLUT-Doublebuffer on Windows 95

Post by Jan Fische » Sat, 30 May 1998 04:00:00


Hello!

I am using GLUT to write OpenGL programs on Windows 95 with hardware
acceleration (nVidia Riva 128).

Now, whenever I use a Double Buffer in an animation, the frame rate
seems to drop drastically. Has anyone else seen similar effects?

Might using WGL instead of GLUT solve the problem?

--
CU, Jan Fischer
http://www.uni-ulm.de/~s_jfisch
http://www.wohnheim.uni-ulm.de/~jfischer

 
 
 

GLUT-Doublebuffer on Windows 95

Post by Jan Fische » Mon, 01 Jun 1998 04:00:00


Hello!

Quote:> > I am using GLUT to write OpenGL programs on Windows 95 with hardware
> > acceleration (nVidia Riva 128).
> > Now, whenever I use a Double Buffer in an animation, the frame rate
> > seems to drop drastically. Has anyone else seen similar effects?
> This is unusual - I would expect double-buffered code to run faster than
> single-buffered.

Yes, you are absolutely right.

Quote:> Remember that the RIVA 128 has only 4 MB of VRAM, and your back buffer
> and depth buffer must all fit in VRAM.  If your desktop is set to
> 1024x768x16, you can run in a window up to approximately 800x800.  If
> your desktop is higher resolution your max window size is
> correspondingly smaller.

That exactly was the problem. I was running my program in 1024x768x16 w/
z-Buffer and double-buffering enabled (oh stupid me!). Reducing the
resolution has improved the rendering speed many, many times.

Many thanks!

--
CU, Jan Fischer
http://www.uni-ulm.de/~s_jfisch
http://www.wohnheim.uni-ulm.de/~jfischer

 
 
 

GLUT-Doublebuffer on Windows 95

Post by Matt » Thu, 04 Jun 1998 04:00:00


Quote:>> > I am using GLUT to write OpenGL programs on Windows 95 with hardware
>> > acceleration (nVidia Riva 128).
>> > Now, whenever I use a Double Buffer in an animation, the frame rate
>> > seems to drop drastically. Has anyone else seen similar effects?
>> This is unusual - I would expect double-buffered code to run faster than
>> single-buffered.

>Yes, you are absolutely right.

>> Remember that the RIVA 128 has only 4 MB of VRAM, and your back buffer
>> and depth buffer must all fit in VRAM.  If your desktop is set to
>> 1024x768x16, you can run in a window up to approximately 800x800.  If
>> your desktop is higher resolution your max window size is
>> correspondingly smaller.

>That exactly was the problem. I was running my program in 1024x768x16 w/
>z-Buffer and double-buffering enabled (oh stupid me!). Reducing the
>resolution has improved the rendering speed many, many times.

Hi,

    I have a similar problem, but a little more drastic.  I am using an
nVidia 4MB video
and suffer from the same buffer size limit as described above.  However,
when my buffer
size goes over the memory limit things seize up.  More specifically, when I
reach a certain
size, all future calls to SwapBuffers() fail.  No error messages are set in
SwapBuffers
for retrieval with GetLastError().

Ok, So how can I detect the memory limit for any graphics card?  Why does it
fail so
ungracefully anyway?

 
 
 

1. GLUT for Windows NT and Windows 95


: |> [...]
: |> wondering if anyone has ported the GLUT to NT.

: A freely distributable OpenGL Utility Toolkit (GLUT) library
: for Windows NT 3.5 (and presumably Windows 95) is in the works.
: I'm not the one working on it, so I'll leave it to Nate to
: explain the status of his work.  From the status message he sent
: to me, it sounds reasonably far along.

Yes, we are fairly far along, there are only a few things left to implement.
We are currently distributing alpha versions of the port to anyone that
would like a copy.  It currently compiles using Visual C++ 2.2, and most of
the example programs work.  I have tested it successfully under Windows NT

-Nate

--
    /|   .--.--
   / |  /(___)
  /  | / /   \   Nate Robins

2. Graphics apps

3. HELP: GLUT on X Window running on Windows 95

4. How to prevent Postscript font distortions...

5. error installing compiling glut 3.6 on windows 95

6. Display list question

7. MPEG files from Windows 95 Glut, How?

8. A Quake level-fly-through using OpenGL -- Source Code

9. Glut 3.5 with Windows 95: Request for assistance

10. Has anyone tried GLUT under Windows 95?

11. GLUT for Windows 95?

12. Looking for GLUT for Windows 95

13. Shareware morphing program for Windows 3.x / Windows 95