20,741
edits
FlightGear benchmark: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
no edit summary
(Created page with "{{Stub}} {{cquote|could some thought be given to producing a benchmark suite for Flightgear. It would need to take in all of the, by now well known, variables - making it by ...") |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
{{cquote|A scripted run would be an EXCELLENT tool.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.mail-archive.com/flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net/msg40295.html|title=<nowiki>Re: [Flightgear-devel] Benchmark matrix</nowiki>|author=geneb|date=Thu, 20 Jun 2013 10:20:41 -0700}}</ref>|geneb}} | {{cquote|A scripted run would be an EXCELLENT tool.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.mail-archive.com/flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net/msg40295.html|title=<nowiki>Re: [Flightgear-devel] Benchmark matrix</nowiki>|author=geneb|date=Thu, 20 Jun 2013 10:20:41 -0700}}</ref>|geneb}} | ||
{{cquote|Is there a benchmarking tool/setup for flightgear? For example a preconfigured/prerecorded flight with fixed variables (weather, time, fov, | |||
etc), fixed nr of frames. Basically everything fixed except rendering options and that it measures how long it takes to render/run and calculate the average FPS? People would be able to compare this value, and one would not be comparing apples with pears. Everybody ran the same benchmark/flight. It would be very helpful in determining if some change brought improvement or made performance worse by a proper measuring instead of staring at the FPS counter in the bottom of the screen during gameplay and 'estimating' if things improved or not.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.mail-archive.com/flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net/msg37014.html|title=<nowiki>Re: [Flightgear-devel] An empassioned plea</nowiki>|author=EViLSLT - Rob|date=Wed, 18 Apr 2012 06:51:44 -0700}}</ref>|EViLSLT - Rob}} | |||
{{cquote|A FGLive type ISO with programs that will benchmark the hardware only.... so what if it runs under *nix.... local optimisations are a matter of personal choice albeit open for public discussion.... you guys would know if this is do-able/worth-while though .... just an idea<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.mail-archive.com/flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net/msg04018.html|title=<nowiki>RE: [Flightgear-devel] FGBenachmark; Was: ..FGLiveCD boot workaround</nowiki>|author=dene maxwell|date=Sun, 21 May 2006 03:42:17 -0700}}</ref>|dene maxwell}} | |||
{{cquote|The FGBenchmark package was meant to compare performance not only under different setups of the same operating system and architecture (say | |||
Linux on x86) but to compare different arcitectures as well. So I put 'fgfs'binaries for different systems (Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris/sparc, Solaris/x86, IRIX) into a package and made a start script that determines which binary to run.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.mail-archive.com/flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net/msg04022.html|title=<nowiki>Re: [Flightgear-devel] FGBenachmark; Was: ..FGLiveCD boot workaround</nowiki>|author=Martin Spott|date=Sun, 21 May 2006 04:08:03 -0700}}</ref>|Martin Spott}} | |||
<references/> | <references/> | ||