Engine's performances

[new.proger]

Hi,

I search a good benchmark between DX and XNA.
I like your engine and the tutorial but I can't find any benchmark.
Do you have a demo project or a simulator of 10000 quad just to test ?

When I use your engine, I create 500 quad with color Shader and without texture, and I find 25 fps it's very poor.

It's my code, your code or XNA ?

Thanks.

I'm a very good C++ developper, a good C# developper and a new graphics developper.
Sorry for my english

[mikeschuld]

The engine itself is not very optimized as it is put together as a teaching tool more than a fully functional engine, so there are many enhancements that could be made to allow for much better fps than it currently achieves with 10000 primitives.

XNA is very similar to Managed DirectX and should get around 95-98% the speed that raw DirectX would, so it is probably not the framework that is causing it. There are I'm sure graphics things that you could be doing that would slow it down some, but many of the people that use this engine in its current state see the same results so the engine code itself is probably the biggest factor in the numbers you are seeing.

At some point in the future if we get enough time, there will probably be a more commercial optimized engine that can handle the numbers of primitives you are talking about, but for now for ease of teaching it will stay as it is.

[Nemo Krad]

The quad draw (to my recollection) is not really intended for bulk quad draws. I have just created a Quad Manager so you can hand it a number of quads with rotations and they ALL get drawn in one call rather than one at a time.

This would speed this instance up. But as Mike says, HME is a learning tool and one day, with time we will optimize it, maybe even have 2 engines, one for education and one for practical use..?