Geek asks and answers

Performance: Quartz2D vs OpenGL ES (GLKit)

I am working on a project where you can draw on the screen using touch. I was thinking about using OpenGL for it, however I came across two examples; one uses OpenGL and the other uses Quartz2D.

Apple GLPaint sample project using OpenGL

Sample project from EffectiveUI using Quartz2D

What amazes me is that the implementation of quartz is significantly faster than the implementation of OpenGL. I always assumed that OpenGL would be faster, because it is a lower level, it can almost talk to the device itself. I know that Quartz2D also uses OpenGL for drawing, so my question is: why is the drawing in the GLPaint example so slow?

Could you make any optimizations for the GLPaint project that would benefit performance?

+5
source share
2 answers

It is well known that on the simulator Quartz 2D can be about 5 times faster than OpenGLES, because OpenGLES is not hardware accelerated (different chipsets, ARM versus i386).

I would highly recommend that you test OpenGLES on a device and compare it to Quartz 2D, and then you should run into 2x performance improvements for OpenGLES.

, OpenGL - . OpenGL , , , , GPU . , TexturePacker, ( PVRTC) OpenGL, .

, GLPaint , PNG , . , ( OpenGL Quartz)

- OpenGL , , . , , .

, , - , - . , - , OpenGL ++ .

+6

OpenGL , , , , . , , API .

UIKit Quartz, OpenGL . OpenGL, , Quartz , , .

+1

More articles:


All Articles