Linked by David Adams on Tue 29th Jun 2010 18:01 UTC, submitted by Michael
Permalink for comment 432006
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 17:26 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 11:29 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:33 UTC
Linked by David Adams on 05/16/13 4:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/11/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/08/13 14:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/02/13 15:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/29/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/24/13 22:24 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-02-15
The title of the article is messed up. LLVMpipe is "still slow"?

It's a software renderer! Is it supposed to beat the NVIDIA GPU used in the test?
It's already quite optimized. It's several times faster than Mesa's old software renderer. I'd say that it's very impressive for how new it is.
There is no mention about image quality of LLVMpipe anywhere, but I assume it produces quite nearly the same output as a real 3D accelerator does. As such, pushing 25fps+ is already quite damn well IMHO. That's a truckload of stuff to do on a processor that isn't optimized for such tasks and thus I atleast find it pretty darn impressive to churn out such numbers.
If the developers can still push some more performance out of it and continue to add the missing bits LLVMpipe will become quite a useful piece of software.
If any of the devs are reading this: congrats with the great work so far and good luck