PDA

View Full Version : OpenGL in Macs: i really cant undestand



juanjgon
09-22-2006, 12:32 AM
I am sure that this subject has been discussed here before, but must insist. I really cant undestand why other applications like Cinema4D has a incredible OpenGL performace in OSX, better in some situations like PC one, and LW is incredible slow ... :thumbsdow

Come one, newtek, i have a scene with 2 MPolygons in 9.0 Layout, who in a Powermac G5 quad with 7800 gfx card needs about 15 secods (yes, 15 seconds) to redraw when you move animation slider, and a PC with a worse GFX card, this scene redraw in 1 second or less. Cinema4D for example redraw in my mac one scene like this in 1 second too, and Modo even better ... why we cant have this performace in Lightwave? ... we really need it if you want to have Mac users working with LW.

I hope you can find a good solution for this in 9.x cycle ...

Kuzey
09-22-2006, 02:32 AM
You do know the UB version of lw9 is coming out when ready?

:D

Having said that, I'm not sure the performance on old Macs would compare to that of intel Macs, but it should be better than what it is now.

Kuzey

___mats___
09-22-2006, 02:46 AM
I agree 100% with juanjgon.. abysmal difference between mac/pc versions.

patiently awaiting the UB version

swpspce
09-22-2006, 07:33 AM
patiently awaiting the UB version

just what does the UB version have to do with a slow OpenGL on a G5? upgrading to another hardware acrchitecture does not resolve the issue at hand for G5 users...

eblu
09-22-2006, 07:33 AM
the reason? theres not "one reason", theres a few factors though.

Lightwave is heavily dependent on the CPU, as opposed to a GPU.
Lightwave is developed for, then ported from an Intel Windows Platform,
the mac version therefore starts out with many idiosyncrasies that are intel centric, and not necessarily beneficial on the mac platform.
Newtek keeps specifically 1 mac guy on staff, historically.
in my experience Newtek does not embrace Apple technologies at the pace of the rest of the industry (for better or worse), sometimes you'd think they aren't even aware of some pretty major things, such as the advent of Xcode, and the death of codewarrior immediately following.

it all adds up.

juanjgon
09-22-2006, 07:44 AM
patiently awaiting the UB version

I am not sure about that simple compiling old OpenGL code using XCode could improve the visualization performance ... in fact i think that not at all. Cinema4D works identical in both PPC and UB versions, it does not depend what compiler they are using, and when in last version they improve OpenGL to get maximun performace with last versions of OSX, both versions speed up about twice as before.

Old display code inside LW must be rewrite using today standars and osx specifications to get maximun performance ... all major packages make this (Modo, C4D, Maya, etc.) ... i hope Newtek could make this too ...

TomT
09-22-2006, 07:52 AM
Kerwin pointed out this last year. The Mods here deleted/modified most of these messages and then banned him. It's not a matter of just porting to Xcode--there's other weaknesses in the NT LW implementation that need to be hammered out. When everyone (the four major applications we tested) was using Codewarrior, NT LW still lagged far behind other implementations.

toby
09-26-2006, 12:25 AM
I am sure that this subject has been discussed here before, but must insist. I really cant undestand why other applications like Cinema4D has a incredible OpenGL performace in OSX, better in some situations like PC one, and LW is incredible slow ... :thumbsdow

Come one, newtek, i have a scene with 2 MPolygons in 9.0 Layout, who in a Powermac G5 quad with 7800 gfx card needs about 15 secods (yes, 15 seconds) to redraw when you move animation slider, and a PC with a worse GFX card, this scene redraw in 1 second or less. Cinema4D for example redraw in my mac one scene like this in 1 second too, and Modo even better ... why we cant have this performace in Lightwave?

Are you using Shaded Solid or Texured mode in Layout? It's much faster than Wireframe. I can spin a million textured polygons around in realtime, with my 2 year old 2x2 G5 and 9800 pro 64mb graphics. It did better than C4D[8] in my tests - it can also depend on what display options you have, and if you have any deformations, etc.

juanjgon
09-26-2006, 12:48 AM
I have a test using ten spheres of 100.000 polygons each (total 1 MPolygon) without any kind of textures or deformations ... perhaps there is something bad in my powermac, but i get a redraw time moving time slider of 11 seconds for shaded view and 2 seconds for wireframe. I check both VBO and Streaming geometry acceleration .... with streaming solid display time is also 11 seconds but wire time is near 10 seconds ... it is like VBO does not work in solid shaded model ... anyway it is really hard work with large scenes with this redraw times :confused:

mattc
09-26-2006, 12:53 AM
have you got any deformations? Those haven't been touched yet AFAIK (hence the abysmal performane with bones and the like).

Other than that, layout is very snappy. I can rotate 1.2 million polys very smoothly.

As for modeler, well, it's slow, but the lack of performance isn't just confined to the opengl display code (that's about 30% of the problem, iirc).

Anyway, enough whining, mac folks look like they've got a good resource in Chilton....so make use of it.

M.

juanjgon
09-26-2006, 01:03 AM
have you got any deformations? Those haven't been touched yet AFAIK (hence the abysmal performane with bones and the like).

Other than that, layout is very snappy. I can rotate 1.2 million polys very smoothly.


I am confused ... i have no deformatios at all, only ten white spheres ... what LW version are you using? ... and what osx? ... if anybody here could test this redraw times in a powermac with 7800 or 6600 gfx could be very useful, perhaps there is a lot of diference between ATI and NVIDIA drivers, or perhaps i am made something wrong :help:

toby
09-28-2006, 04:00 AM
Ok, got around to doing your test, 15 spheres, total 149,000 polygons, mapped with an hdr and textures displayed at 1024x1024, added the frame rate meter, I got 2.5 frames per second. That's without turning off my usual display options like show motion paths. Multi-texturing is on, not GLSL.
dual 2ghz G5 ati 9800 pro

whoops, that's 1,490,000 polygons!

juanjgon
09-28-2006, 04:32 AM
I have see that if you put a hi bounding box threshold in display preferences so no bounding box switch in interaction, this is a lot faster ... the problem is that when you have a low bounding box threshold, after any kind of interactive operation in models or time slider, the time that LW need to redraw from wire bounding box to full solid or texture view is really hi, and this are the times i post first in this thread.

juanjgon
09-28-2006, 04:36 AM
Thinking about my last post ... perhaps problem is that LW clear all OpenGL geometry and texture caches and optimizations to draw the bounding box in weireframe, and after it needs to process all this data again to draw the solid or texture view .... what do you think, Chilton?

juanjgon
09-28-2006, 06:29 AM
BTW ... i also see that problems i have picking objects in layout does not exist with a very hi bounding box threshold. Bounding box redrawing are the source of all my OpenGL problems in LW9

toby
09-28-2006, 01:06 PM
Where would we be without the forums?! Just goes to show you how deep and complicated 3D software is!
:beerchug: