i have uploaded two binary packages to the sourceforge download page.
i am in need of the framerates to plan my next step in coding the final tileengine.
very helpfull are framerates on systems < 6xxx nvidia or compareable ati cards.

the slower version is using all the time 4 texture units to draw the terrain.
the faster version uses most time only 1 texture unit - only if a tile border is crossed 4 texture units are used to draw the tiles to a rendertexture.

both versions have some pro/cons

1 TU:
+ fast
- more gfxmem usage

4 TU:
- much slower
- filtering error hack reduces texture detail or the number of tiles in the atlastexture
+ code is very readable
+ very easy to change the view and the view distance in runtime

i got the RT version the first one and my best frames were at 65.7

it usually ranged from 50-60 frames if this information helps at all :]

~missy

EDIT: maybe i should tell you what system i have too hahaha

Dell Intel extreme 2 internal graphics card (ha...)
pentium 4 processor 2.66 mhz or whatever there called :]

I used the RT version too...
Averaging 480 fps
High: 550
Low: 316

Seems to degrade a bit as i move around--but i could easily be wrong.

System:
ATI Mobility Radeon X700, 256 onboard ram (counterpart is the geforce 6600)
7,200 RPM hard drive, 8mb cache
Pentium M 1.73 processor

Hope that helps

Cheers,
Unislash

thx, but i need the fps of both versions to compare the output.
yes, when crossing a tile border some calculations are done - that slows down a bit.

both run at 60fps on my machine, but i suspect that the true reason is for some reason Ogre3d is not utilizing my graphics acceleration...

I don't know why however...

sorry polyveg :]

running the second one made my screen freakout, then when it started it got smooth (probably because i accidentally tried to log on a local server which i had none, usually that makes any client of mine freak out)

it ran average of 30 frames and never went over 40 or under 20

hope this helps!

~missy

RT Version:
Averaging 480 fps
High: 550
Low: 316

Other One:
Averaging 180
High: 230
Low: 130

System:
ATI Mobility Radeon X700, 256 onboard ram (counterpart is the geforce 6600)
7,200 RPM hard drive, 8mb cache
Pentium M 1.73 processor

Cheers,
Unislash

PS: The skeleton is still messed up for me

I got 10 FPS with the woRT version, using Intel integrated video.

From your OP, I guess testing on Nvidia 8600GT is not useful to you?

@all: thank you for your time.

@tpk: looks like you have fixed the frames to 60, look at your gfx card options

@ grommit: yes, i dont need such a power for the low detail stuff

@all other: some more tests on slow machines would be nice

RT Version:
Averaging 700 fps
High: 800
Low: 650
Had tile artifacts


woRT Version:
Averaging 400
High: 450
Low: 350
woRT looked much smoother, animation looked more realistic and there were no tile artifacts

(found the problem with my video card =))