From: Dave Akers (dla@engr.sgi.com)
Date: 12/19/2000 12:30:33
Hi Aaron,
Thanks for your message. Here's some information I hope you will find
useful:
The 3-D texturing fill performance of the Octane2 depends on several
factors. Because of the nature of the texture cache, you're likely to get
much better performance from certain orientations (slicing along the "r"
texture axis is best.) This orientation dependence is most extreme when
the window size is small relative to the resolution of the volume. The
larger this ratio, the better the performance. For comparison purposes,
can you send me the full output of running /usr/gfx/gfxinfo on your
system? Thanks...
As far as image quality, Octane2 has two framebuffer modes:
10-bytes-per-pixel and 18-bytes-per-pixel. The latter of the two will give
you good quality visuals for volume rendering (but slightly less memory
left over for textures, since textures and framebuffer share the same
memory.)
Octane2 does have full RGBA post-interpolation texture lookup tables,
which separates it from IMPACT. (IMPACT could do LUMINANCE_ALPHA but not
full RGBA in post-interpolation.)
I'm not sure about the Crystal Eyes stereo setup off the top of my head,
but I will ask around.
As time moves forward, we hope to provide some white papers on volume
rendering performance and quality across our different machines. This
would allow you to make much more informed decisions regarding hardware
purchases.
Dave
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Dec 19 2000 - 12:42:12 PST