On Friday, 5 June 2009 at 18:28, Jason Daly wrote:
> Wow, 2400 sources is an awful lot of mixing to do, no matter how well the
> mixing loop is optimized. Furthermore, once you get above 30-60 sources
> (depending on content), the benefits of adding more and more sources to
> the soundfield start to diminish.
Oh, I'm sure reducing the number of sources would be good (especially since
OpenAL Soft's maximum is 256, so we drop random sources now anyway). It "just"
needs someone to do it.
And I didn't want to imply that OpenAL Soft _needs_ to be optimized more. I
tested 1.3 (the version that used the least CPU in my earlier tests), and while
it does 42 sources at 13% CPU, it also chokes somewhere below 64 sources. So
current git is the best OpenAL Soft so far, and if it is released as it is and
replaces 1.7 everywhere I'm quite happy with that.
But I did the same tests with OpenAL-Sample from
svn://connect.creativelabs.com/OpenAL/trunk, and it does 1024 sources at 60%
CPU, scaling down more or less linearly (doing 256 sources at 14%). So if
OpenAL Soft's goal is to be better than the Sample Implementation in every way,
it isn't there yet.
Best regards,
Christian Ohm
_______________________________________________
Openal-devel mailing list
Openal-devel@...
http://opensource.creative.com/mailman/listinfo/openal-devel
