Survey: Do You Support Framebuffers and/or Non-Po2 [RERUN]

[BlackBulletIV]

Important! There were bugs in the first test, and it also didn't test the max framebuffer size. I've updated it. If you tested before page 2 of the posts, please re-run the test, re-vote, and re-post.

As suggested by Jasoco, I think there needs to be a survey on how many people support what features. I've devised a test .love to make this easy. This is the
features it detects:

• Framebuffer support.
• Non-Po2 framebuffer support.
• Non-Po2 image support.
• Maximum Po2 framebuffer size.
• Maximum power of 3 (non-Po2) framebuffer size.

The first two it will detect automatically, it'll need some help for the third one. If you see a red square, just press 'y'; if not, press 'n'. Then press space to test the framebuffer size. These instructions are in the .love file anyway. Once done, please pick what "You Support: ..." text up the top-left says in the poll above. If you could post your results (what you support, the framebuffer sizes). It'd also be great if you post your machine's specs as well.

feature-test.love

(1.02 KiB) Downloaded 687 times

My personal results:
Framebuffers, Non-Po2 framebuffers, Non-Po2 Images
Framebuffers up to the size of 4096 x 4096
Po3 framebuffers up to the size of 2187 x 2187

Machine: MacBook Pro 2,1 with Mac OS X 10.6.7
CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo 2 Ghz
Memory: 2 GB DDR2
Graphics: 64 MB shared. GMA 950 chipset.

[BarnD]

As I voted mine was "You support: Non-Po2 Images".
My specs:
CPU: Intel Pentium 4 (2.80GHz)
RAM: 756mb DDR1
128mb Nvidia GeForce FX 5200
(crappy, I know)

Linux Mint 9 currently as the OS

[Jasoco]

Damn. We had the same idea. I made my own test. It's in the Support forum.

http://love2d.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=2908

My program goes to extreme lengths to tell you exactly what you support. We should merge our threads. Yours has a poll, mine has a super mega awesome app that tests the limits from 1x1 to 8192x8192 one dozen FB's each time.

BTW: My MacBook Pro supports up to 4096x4096 framebuffers. And doesn't require PO2 images.

[Lafolie]

Sort the love package out!

You support: Framebuffers, Non-Po2 Images.

MBP 5,1
Intel Core 2 Duo 2.4GHz
2GB DDR3
Nvidia GeForce 9400M (chip, but shared RAM... 256 I think)
OS X 10.6

I've got a GeForce 9600M GT with dedicated VRAM but switching to that would mean I'd have to log out/in again and closing all my apps. I don't really use the big gfx card much anyway so I guess the 9400M is the better one to be posting. I'll switch and post it up when I get the chance though.

[Jasoco]

I've got a GeForce 9600M GT with dedicated VRAM but switching to that would mean I'd have to log out/in again and closing all my apps. I don't really use the big gfx card much anyway so I guess the 9400M is the better one to be posting. I'll switch and post it up when I get the chance though.

Didn't they patch it so you can switch on the fly? Or was that just on newer MBP's?

[slime]

That's only the more recent MBP's. I have the same computer as Lafolie.

[Wulfie]

Support: Frame Buffers & Non Po2 images

Dell Latitude d520 Laptop
Intel Dual core
2 gigs RAM
Running Ubuntu 10.04

[Lafolie]

That's only the more recent MBP's. I have the same computer as Lafolie.

Yup. It's a hardware thing, so it's not really possible to change with a software patch. To be honest though, I prefer being able to set it myself. Unless you still have the option to force one particular card to handle the work on the newer ones.... it would annoy me to have no control over that.

Getting off topic anyway.

[bmelts]

There's a bug where it doesn't detect support for Non-Po2 framebuffers properly. Line 19 should be

Code: Select all

status, fb = pcall(love.graphics.newFramebuffer, 10, 10)

I get all 3 supported

[Robin]

This is interesting. BlackBullet's thing says I support Framebuffers, Non-Po2 Images, while Jasoco's says I support NPO2 framebuffers (Created 12 Framebuffers of size: 4096 x 4096)