Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
When I was reading up on measuring Frames Per Second in OpenGL I came across this:
How to measure true FPS performance of OpenGL ES?
What I got from it was that you can get the FPS but its not a true indication of performance, and that Frame Duration would be a better choice. Are their any other ways to measure rendering performances for OpenGL? And if so why are they better (or worse) than the last?
I’m not sure I understood why FPS is not a good indication for performance too.
It’s not so much that it’s not a ‘true indication of performance’, it’s just that if you don’t know what you’re talking about it can be easily misleading.
If you really want to target a certain FPS, then there’s nothing wrong with looking at it as a metric, but you just have to remember that it’s not a linear measure of performance.
For example, if your FPS goes from 30 to 20, then that’s a pretty significant decrease in frame performance time (33 ms to 50 ms)
However if your FPS goes from 2000 to 400, that’s a miniscule difference in real time (only 2ms difference).
Using FPS is discouraged because then you get new developers worked up in a panic saying “my FPS decreased by 1600, what did I do wrong??”