>
> Dear Daeron and the rest of the list. (Especially you browserbuilders) I have
> a problem with opengl. The problem is that on PCs opengl tends to be slow (100
> mhz p5 with 32 megs RAM) Now I do have a hardware accelerator for my Matrox
> impression plus. At Matrox they are saying that they want to support opengl at
> a future date however I should expect about 40k polys a seconf on that system.
> Using the rendermorphics library I would (according to rendermorphics!) be
> able to push 300k polys a sec (My pentium can benchmarked in C (haven't tried
> asm) only push about 200k polys a sec). With such differences it makes me
> wonder if it would be worth it to translate from opengl to rendermorphics
> specs on the fly and use that.
Actually you won't get 300k polys/sec out of a matrox card. The card is
only capable of about 90k (the new STORM card is a bit better). None of
the currently available PC accelerator cards will get 300k polys/sec
although some new cards which will be sampling Q3 this year will.
Needless to say, we will be supporting all the new cards, including the
ones which go really fast :-).
>
> NOTE: I may sound like an idiot here and i'm getting the specs right after I
> wrote this letter. My impression is that vrml relies heavily on opengl if I'm
> wrong; please don't flame; or ad me to any "dog"lists (I'm sensitive ;-) I'm
> just fairly scatterbrained and if I don't post my thoughts when they come up I
> might never do it.
I don't think that this is the case. The only bit of handwaving needed
is in translating the material information into something which Reality
Lab can use. Future versions of RL will support all of the materials
which OpenGL can.
-- Doug Rabson, Microsoft RenderMorphics Ltd. Mail: [email protected] Phone: +44 171 251 4411 FAX: +44 171 251 0939