[sldev] Re: Texture caching
asuter at ilm.com
Wed Mar 21 12:36:34 PDT 2007
Argent Stonecutter wrote:
>> Usually because of disk space issues, in that you can rapidly fill it
>> all up.
>> Could be a slick alternative implementation... trade disk space for
> Isn't that what caching is *for*? :) :) :) :)
You bet your bippy. ;) I guess we're talking about the magnitude of
disk space used.
500GB versus 50GB versus 256mb video memory.
Has anyone compared the relative costs of a cache miss versus image
I would speculate that having a huge (carefully indexed, persistent
teleports) compressed cache would be perceived as faster than an also
huge, but with
less cached textures, uncompressed cache.
With Jason's multiple levels of cache, a sweet spot could probably be
More information about the SLDev