lol, I thought you would of known that.. Cause I know I did.BlackBulletIV wrote:EDIT: Oh wait! Of course nothing happens! You guys don't support framebuffers, and the code is set to do nothing. However it should give a "thanks" message... I'll have to fix that sometime soon.
Survey: Do You Support Framebuffers and/or Non-Po2 [RERUN]
Re: Survey: Do You Support Framebuffers and/or Non-Po2 [RERU
Re: Survey: Do You Support Framebuffers and/or Non-Po2 [RERU
Nice idea !
my specs are:
Fujitsu Laptop Esprimo Mobile
Intel Core2 Duo @ 2.53GHz
3GB Ram
Mobile Intel 4 Series Express GFx (onboard, shared memory)
Results from Test:
Framebuffers NonPO2, Images NonPO2
max Size 4096x4096 - 3x 2187x2187
my specs are:
Fujitsu Laptop Esprimo Mobile
Intel Core2 Duo @ 2.53GHz
3GB Ram
Mobile Intel 4 Series Express GFx (onboard, shared memory)
Results from Test:
Framebuffers NonPO2, Images NonPO2
max Size 4096x4096 - 3x 2187x2187
- sharpobject
- Prole
- Posts: 44
- Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2011 2:32 pm
- Location: California
Re: Survey: Do You Support Framebuffers and/or Non-Po2 [RERU
The test for large framebuffers causes love 0.7.1 to crash under OSX 10.6.7.
- BlackBulletIV
- Inner party member
- Posts: 1261
- Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2010 8:19 pm
- Location: Queensland, Australia
- Contact:
Re: Survey: Do You Support Framebuffers and/or Non-Po2 [RERU
Thanks guys.
Argh. For now, just don't hit space. What are your results then?sharpobject wrote:The test for large framebuffers causes love 0.7.1 to crash under OSX 10.6.7.
- sharpobject
- Prole
- Posts: 44
- Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2011 2:32 pm
- Location: California
Re: Survey: Do You Support Framebuffers and/or Non-Po2 [RERU
Everything else works. Voted appropriately.
Machine: MacBookPro7,1 with OSX 10.6.7
CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo 2.4GHz
Memory: 4 GB DDR3
Graphics: NVIDIA GeForce 320M 256 MB
Machine: MacBookPro7,1 with OSX 10.6.7
CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo 2.4GHz
Memory: 4 GB DDR3
Graphics: NVIDIA GeForce 320M 256 MB
- Taehl
- Dreaming in associative arrays
- Posts: 1025
- Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 5:07 am
- Location: CA, USA
- Contact:
Re: Survey: Do You Support Framebuffers and/or Non-Po2 [RERU
Framebuffers, Non-Po2 framebuffers, Non-Po2 Images
Framebuffers up to the size of 16384 x 16384 (holy crap!)
Po3 framebuffers up to the size of 6561 x 6561
Machine: Windows 7 Pro x64
CPU: AMD Athlon 64 x2 6000+
Memory: 4 gigs DDR2
Graphics: Nvidia GTS 250 with 1 gig GDDR3
Framebuffers up to the size of 16384 x 16384 (holy crap!)
Po3 framebuffers up to the size of 6561 x 6561
Machine: Windows 7 Pro x64
CPU: AMD Athlon 64 x2 6000+
Memory: 4 gigs DDR2
Graphics: Nvidia GTS 250 with 1 gig GDDR3
Earliest Love2D supporter who can't Love anymore. Let me disable pixel shaders if I don't use them, dammit!
Lenovo Thinkpad X60 Tablet, built like a tank. But not fancy enough for Love2D 0.10.0+.
Lenovo Thinkpad X60 Tablet, built like a tank. But not fancy enough for Love2D 0.10.0+.
Re: Survey: Do You Support Framebuffers and/or Non-Po2 [RERU
It seems to me that RAM plays a large part in the framebuffers' maximum size. Not surprising, but goddamn, are you sure that's right?! Even with 1GB VRAM, that's huuuuuuuge.Taehl wrote:Framebuffers, Non-Po2 framebuffers, Non-Po2 Images
Framebuffers up to the size of 16384 x 16384 (holy crap!)
Po3 framebuffers up to the size of 6561 x 6561
Do you recognise when the world won't stop for you? Or when the days don't care what you've got to do? When the weight's too tough to lift up, what do you? Don't let them choose for you, that's on you.
- Taehl
- Dreaming in associative arrays
- Posts: 1025
- Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 5:07 am
- Location: CA, USA
- Contact:
Re: Survey: Do You Support Framebuffers and/or Non-Po2 [RERU
That's exactly what the test told me. Either the test has a bug, or else Nvidia pulled off something amazing with their 200 series (besides just being great cards in general).
EDIT) Huh... Doing the math gives something interesting:
16384 * 16384 (claimed framebuffer texture size) * 4 (4 bytes per pixel (BGRA)) = 1,073,741,824 bytes
1024 ^ 3 (a gigabyte) = 1,073,741,824 bytes
EDIT) Huh... Doing the math gives something interesting:
16384 * 16384 (claimed framebuffer texture size) * 4 (4 bytes per pixel (BGRA)) = 1,073,741,824 bytes
1024 ^ 3 (a gigabyte) = 1,073,741,824 bytes
Earliest Love2D supporter who can't Love anymore. Let me disable pixel shaders if I don't use them, dammit!
Lenovo Thinkpad X60 Tablet, built like a tank. But not fancy enough for Love2D 0.10.0+.
Lenovo Thinkpad X60 Tablet, built like a tank. But not fancy enough for Love2D 0.10.0+.
Re: Survey: Do You Support Framebuffers and/or Non-Po2 [RERU
No way... as if it maxed out like that. Wow.
Do you recognise when the world won't stop for you? Or when the days don't care what you've got to do? When the weight's too tough to lift up, what do you? Don't let them choose for you, that's on you.
Re: Survey: Do You Support Framebuffers and/or Non-Po2 [RERU
This is what I got with my Radeon HD 5870:
Result wrote:Framebuffers
Non-Po2 Framebuffers
Non-Po2 Images
Framebuffers up to the size 32768 x 32768
Power of 3 Framebuffers up to the size 19683 x 19683
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests