Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Qartz Extreme vs. 3D
- Thread starter etoiles
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
speed improvement in interface speed with QE is pretty minimal, if any.. but what matters is that with QE interface takes lot less cpu power and resources, schiller showed it in that "power of x" presentation.. pretty cool stuff
I am still a bit confused (sorry)
on the apple quartz webpage, They say:"Quartz uses the integrated OpenGL technology to convert each window into a texture, then sends it to the graphics card to render on-screen"
So is this only done when you move a window around, or change a window ? Or is every window stored as an OpenGL texture all the time (=using quite a few resources on the video card) ? Maybe I am just being paranoid here, but I suspect there must be a performance hit either way, even if the card switches between drawing the UI and the content.
I agree that QE looks supercool, and I understand that it takes some load off the cpu, but when working in 3D I'd rather have the graphics card focus on what is going on inside the windows rather than the windows themselves. Which takes us back to the old question: do all the aqua gimmicks make sense in a production environment (graphics) ? Or has the mac evolved into a living room computer, like a sort of designer couch - more form than function, but damn impressive (ouch, am I gonna get flamed for this 😀 )
on the apple quartz webpage, They say:"Quartz uses the integrated OpenGL technology to convert each window into a texture, then sends it to the graphics card to render on-screen"
So is this only done when you move a window around, or change a window ? Or is every window stored as an OpenGL texture all the time (=using quite a few resources on the video card) ? Maybe I am just being paranoid here, but I suspect there must be a performance hit either way, even if the card switches between drawing the UI and the content.
I agree that QE looks supercool, and I understand that it takes some load off the cpu, but when working in 3D I'd rather have the graphics card focus on what is going on inside the windows rather than the windows themselves. Which takes us back to the old question: do all the aqua gimmicks make sense in a production environment (graphics) ? Or has the mac evolved into a living room computer, like a sort of designer couch - more form than function, but damn impressive (ouch, am I gonna get flamed for this 😀 )