akhil wrote:
Thanks for clearing that for me. Is there a particular reason why?
If you just want to copy a buffer to the screen, there can be nothing better than a direct copy to the framebuffer.
In OpenGL ES the data needs to be copied to texture memory first. Textures are assumed to be mostly static, thus the GL implementation may reformat the data to optimize the spatial layout for filtering. Simple scanline order is not very good for that.
And to render a quad GL performs a lot of additional operations (whether hardware or software) compared to a simple copy, which means increased power draw.
Quote:
I have tried to find some info on compressed textures, but havnt been able to understand clearly. In what way are compressed textures different from normal textures? Sorry, I know this question is not exactly in line with the subject.
The image data is just compressed using a lossy block-based encoding. Compressed textures need less space and thus less bandwidth, but depending on the texture contents there may be a reduction of image quality.
Quote:
Sounds interesting. Im using a 5_6_5 16bit RGB buffer. Why would a "texture bindable pbuffer" reduce reformatting as compared to a normal buffer? Ill try it anyway, thanks for this suggestion. Really do appreciate it.
Because, as opposed to normal textures, pbuffers are assumed to contain dynamic data. The reformatting can be expensive and only pays off in an "update once, use many times" scenario.