Hello, everyone,
I found this on the site of "Tom's Hardware" :
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/2d-windows-gdi,2539.html?xtmc=2d&xtcr=4
This is a longish article on 2D performance.
It was made because of ATI/AMD seemingly having *huge* 2D-performance problems. Something no-one had expected to ever be.
The German site also has an in-depth article looking at the differences of GDI vs. Directx : http://www.tomshardware.com/de/wddm-2d-performance,testberichte-240487.html
My general comment towards all of this is just :
Yes, the performance problems of 2D were always there - but no-one ever noticed them. There are simply no more or only very few benchmarks for 2D out there anymore, because no-one is interested in 2D anymore. All everyone is interested in is 3D.
3D rulez ! Who needs 2D ?
Alrik
I found this on the site of "Tom's Hardware" :
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/2d-windows-gdi,2539.html?xtmc=2d&xtcr=4
This is a longish article on 2D performance.
It was made because of ATI/AMD seemingly having *huge* 2D-performance problems. Something no-one had expected to ever be.
The German site also has an in-depth article looking at the differences of GDI vs. Directx : http://www.tomshardware.com/de/wddm-2d-performance,testberichte-240487.html
My general comment towards all of this is just :
Yes, the performance problems of 2D were always there - but no-one ever noticed them. There are simply no more or only very few benchmarks for 2D out there anymore, because no-one is interested in 2D anymore. All everyone is interested in is 3D.
3D rulez ! Who needs 2D ?
Alrik