drawing to pixmap is faster than drawing to screen

BlitzMax Forums/BlitzMax Programming/drawing to pixmap is faster than drawing to screen

Jesse(Posted 2010) [#1]
?
I need some volunteers to test this. Please.
I was going to put this directly in the code archives but wanted wanted to know if it works good on everyones computer.
It basically illustrate that drawing to a pixmap is faster than using max2d commands to draw to the back buffer. The only draw back is that none of the advanced 3d functionality is available for pixmaps but for some dirty fast classic game design, I think it's great.



Brucey(Posted 2010) [#2]
DrawPixmap pixmap,0,0

DrawPixmap is notoriously slow... you are better using LoadImage(pixmap) and DrawImage.


GfK(Posted 2010) [#3]
When drawing on pixmaps nothing is sent to the graphics card. But if you modify an image/pixmap then draw it, it will be uploaded each and every time so ultimately, its going to be slower.


N(Posted 2010) [#4]
If you want to modify pixels and stuff by hand, you should probably use something like SDL.


Jesse(Posted 2010) [#5]
yes I forgot that pixmaps don't work in Vista and Windows 7
pixmaps are faster on my HP dual core with intel graphics.


GfK(Posted 2010) [#6]
yes I forgot that pixmaps don't work in Vista and Windows 7
Huh? Says who??


Jesse(Posted 2010) [#7]
there where several complaints that they could not use drawpixmap to display pixmap on Windows 7 and Vista.

Just in case no one noticed I modified the source to display the pixmap as image.


Jesse(Posted 2010) [#8]
it's funny on my laptop with mobile Intel 945 graphics with 256 MB mem it runs really fast with pixmaps but when I tried it on my desktop with GEForce 9500 with 512 MB memory it ran really slow, a lot slower than the Intel Graphics did. I can say that the intel graphics ran the pixmap version twice as fast as the GEForce did.
I am not even going to try to ask why because I won't be happy with any explanation.
I'll try it on a mac in a while.
And I don't think I'll be posting it in the Code Archives.


_JIM(Posted 2010) [#9]
One possible explanation would be that the Intel version doesn't have to upload the pixmap to video memory because there isn't any video memory. It's shared from RAM. So maybe a memcpy is faster than RAM-to-VRAM.


jsp(Posted 2010) [#10]
it's funny on my laptop with mobile Intel 945 graphics with 256 MB mem it runs really fast with pixmap

Was the same with my old Dell laptop with Intel graphics...


Jesse(Posted 2010) [#11]
anybody else?
I gave up on the idea anyway.
too much inconsistency.