Timeline for What is the fastest way of reading an atomic counter?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 16, 2019 at 13:21 | answer | added | serg06 | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jun 3, 2015 at 15:36 | history | edited | user1430 | edited tags | |
| Feb 9, 2015 at 22:41 | answer | added | Andreas | timeline score: 3 | |
| Feb 9, 2015 at 21:19 | comment | added | Andreas | I am going to try something similar to buffer ping-ponging to solve this. It seems that the problem is that each time I do this the CPU and GPU spend ages syncing. I am not sure I have the corrrect solution, but I will post it as soon as I get any positive results. | |
| Feb 9, 2015 at 19:16 | comment | added | david van brink | I'm not posting this as an answer, because I'm just learning this part of OpenGL also, and kind-of making stuff up. That said -- two things to try might be: 1) would it be ok to read it only every, say 200 frames, and average? 2) maybe "ping-ponging" two or more buffers would help, since reading and drawing wouldn't necessarily block each other. Not sure what the change-and-read sequence recipe exactly should be... | |
| Feb 9, 2015 at 10:15 | comment | added | Andreas | it`s the buffer read which affects the performance. The atomic increment has neglible impact. | |
| Feb 9, 2015 at 2:04 | comment | added | david van brink | Is it the atomic increment, or the buffer read, which seems to impact performance? You can determine this by removing one, then the other. | |
| Feb 9, 2015 at 0:10 | history | asked | Andreas | CC BY-SA 3.0 |