I know that's an old dirty issue; GDI+ almost -the slowest part of the
framework - has bothered many developers using it in animations. Even in
managed C++ the performance is awful.
Now, any dude out there does know any thing about this issue in VS 2005 +
..NET 2.0 ? Has Microsoft solved this performance problem, or we will have to
again stick to that DX for simple animations in our applications?
( and since Microsoft doesn't support DDraw any more, and also because
managed DX9 SDK is unimaginable for download -200mb - via modem, we have to
really stick to the old DX7, which many users don't have, and which makes
our application quiet big in size.)
Thank for help
10  2382 
Hi,
"**ham" <fr****@hotmails.com> wrote in message
news:el**************@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl... I know that's an old dirty issue; GDI+ almost -the slowest part of the
framework - has bothered many developers using it in animations. Even in
managed C++ the performance is awful.
It doesn't matter what language you use when the bottleneck is within
managed library, does it?
Now, any dude out there does know any thing about this issue in VS 2005 +
.NET 2.0 ? Has Microsoft solved this performance problem, or we will have
to
again stick to that DX for simple animations in our applications?
( and since Microsoft doesn't support DDraw any more, and also because
managed DX9 SDK is unimaginable for download -200mb - via modem, we have
to
really stick to the old DX7, which many users don't have, and which makes
our application quiet big in size.)
Actually, DX9 redistributable (note *not* SDK as end-user doesn't need SDK)
is quite significantly smaller - around 36Mb if I am not mistaken and it is
a way to go for animations IMO.
And you don't need DDraw - using DirectX3D is actually better and perhaps
easier.
--
Miha Markic [MVP C#] - RightHand .NET consulting & development
SLODUG - Slovene Developer Users Group
www.rthand.com
Thank for help
They are adding another type of back buffer, that is supposed to be faster
for explicit double buffering, and new text drawing functions. I believe
that is it.
The performance is not awful for simple animations. GDI+ must be used
carefully for good performance, it is true, but once you do that, the
performance is fine in most cases. It depends how many pixels you are
animating at once, and how you optimize the screen updates. Make sure you
only redraw the pixels you need to redraw.
Regards,
Frank Hileman
check out VG.net: http://www.vgdotnet.com
Animated vector graphics system
Integrated Visual Studio .NET graphics editor
"**ham" <fr****@hotmails.com> wrote in message
news:el**************@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl... I know that's an old dirty issue; GDI+ almost -the slowest part of the
framework - has bothered many developers using it in animations. Even in
managed C++ the performance is awful.
Now, any dude out there does know any thing about this issue in VS 2005 +
.NET 2.0 ? Has Microsoft solved this performance problem, or we will have
to
again stick to that DX for simple animations in our applications?
( and since Microsoft doesn't support DDraw any more, and also because
managed DX9 SDK is unimaginable for download -200mb - via modem, we have
to
really stick to the old DX7, which many users don't have, and which makes
our application quiet big in size.)
Thank for help
One more thing: they are getting right of expensive calls to Enum.IsDefined
throughout System.Drawing, thanks to my complaints.
- Frank
Actually GDI+ is not part of the framework at all - its an unmanaged library
with a thin managed wrapper. Just in case you think that might solve your
problem, its also pretty darned slow when called directly from unmanaged
code.
Cheers
Doug Forster
"**ham" <fr****@hotmails.com> wrote in message
news:el**************@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl... I know that's an old dirty issue; GDI+ almost -the slowest part of the
framework - has bothered many developers using it in animations. Even in
managed C++ the performance is awful.
Now, any dude out there does know any thing about this issue in VS 2005 +
.NET 2.0 ? Has Microsoft solved this performance problem, or we will have
to
again stick to that DX for simple animations in our applications?
( and since Microsoft doesn't support DDraw any more, and also because
managed DX9 SDK is unimaginable for download -200mb - via modem, we have
to
really stick to the old DX7, which many users don't have, and which makes
our application quiet big in size.)
Thank for help
The base problem is whereas the old GDI was graphics card accelerated GDI+
isn't. The "bonus" is that if you can get acceptable performance, you can
get it on any PC. With some knowledge of the system bottlenecks, performance
for business type of applications such as charting, diagramming etc can be
acceptable. For game type apps and large animations etc, managed DX9 is the
recommended route.
You seem to be concerned about a DX download/redistributable but keep in
mind that most users will also have to download .NET framework
redistibutable anyway.
James
--
Create interactive diagrams and flowcharts with ERM Diagram at http://www.crainiate.net
Take the ERM Tour at http://www.flowchartcontrol.com
"**ham" <fr****@hotmails.com> wrote in message
news:el**************@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl... I know that's an old dirty issue; GDI+ almost -the slowest part of the
framework - has bothered many developers using it in animations. Even in
managed C++ the performance is awful.
Now, any dude out there does know any thing about this issue in VS 2005 +
.NET 2.0 ? Has Microsoft solved this performance problem, or we will have
to
again stick to that DX for simple animations in our applications?
( and since Microsoft doesn't support DDraw any more, and also because
managed DX9 SDK is unimaginable for download -200mb - via modem, we have
to
really stick to the old DX7, which many users don't have, and which makes
our application quiet big in size.)
Thank for help
The case of supporting GDI+ by hardware is quiet absord. How should i expect
my costumers to buy the latest graphic cards (or update their drivers) while
the applications with GDI* drawings commonly don't have purposes of their DX
counterparts ( like heavy games). No one accepts to do so many system
changes for a simple (but neccessary) animation. Besides, i think it is the
duty of Microsoft to make thier GDI+ compatible with the common graphic
cards of the planet, because GDI+ is a very common technology and more
people will use it than DX.
"James Westgate" <ja***********@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
news:uk**************@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl... The base problem is whereas the old GDI was graphics card accelerated GDI+
isn't. The "bonus" is that if you can get acceptable performance, you can
get it on any PC. With some knowledge of the system bottlenecks,
performance for business type of applications such as charting,
diagramming etc can be acceptable. For game type apps and large animations
etc, managed DX9 is the recommended route.
You seem to be concerned about a DX download/redistributable but keep in
mind that most users will also have to download .NET framework
redistibutable anyway.
James
--
Create interactive diagrams and flowcharts with ERM Diagram at
http://www.crainiate.net
Take the ERM Tour at http://www.flowchartcontrol.com
"**ham" <fr****@hotmails.com> wrote in message
news:el**************@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...I know that's an old dirty issue; GDI+ almost -the slowest part of the
framework - has bothered many developers using it in animations. Even in
managed C++ the performance is awful.
Now, any dude out there does know any thing about this issue in VS 2005 +
.NET 2.0 ? Has Microsoft solved this performance problem, or we will have
to
again stick to that DX for simple animations in our applications?
( and since Microsoft doesn't support DDraw any more, and also because
managed DX9 SDK is unimaginable for download -200mb - via modem, we have
to
really stick to the old DX7, which many users don't have, and which makes
our application quiet big in size.)
Thank for help
The case of supporting GDI+ by hardware is quiet absurd. How should I expect
my costumers to buy the latest graphic cards (or update their drivers) while
the applications with GDI* drawings commonly don't have purposes of their DX
counterparts ( like heavy games). No one accepts to do so many system
changes for a simple (but necessary) animation. Besides, I think it is the
duty of Microsoft to make their GDI+ compatible with the common graphic
cards of the planet, because GDI+ is a very common technology and more
people will use it than DX.
( i wonder if they have already done this for their framework....Mac. is the
case)
"James Westgate" <ja***********@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
news:uk**************@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl... The base problem is whereas the old GDI was graphics card accelerated GDI+
isn't. The "bonus" is that if you can get acceptable performance, you can
get it on any PC. With some knowledge of the system bottlenecks,
performance for business type of applications such as charting,
diagramming etc can be acceptable. For game type apps and large animations
etc, managed DX9 is the recommended route.
You seem to be concerned about a DX download/redistributable but keep in
mind that most users will also have to download .NET framework
redistibutable anyway.
James
--
Create interactive diagrams and flowcharts with ERM Diagram at
http://www.crainiate.net
Take the ERM Tour at http://www.flowchartcontrol.com
"**ham" <fr****@hotmails.com> wrote in message
news:el**************@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...I know that's an old dirty issue; GDI+ almost -the slowest part of the
framework - has bothered many developers using it in animations. Even in
managed C++ the performance is awful.
Now, any dude out there does know any thing about this issue in VS 2005 +
.NET 2.0 ? Has Microsoft solved this performance problem, or we will have
to
again stick to that DX for simple animations in our applications?
( and since Microsoft doesn't support DDraw any more, and also because
managed DX9 SDK is unimaginable for download -200mb - via modem, we have
to
really stick to the old DX7, which many users don't have, and which makes
our application quiet big in size.)
Thank for help
The point James was making is that generally it doesn't matter which
graphics card you have, performance is all the same using GDI+. If you can
get good performance on one card by knowing the system and recognising where
the bottlenecks are you can get that same performance on all cards.
AFAIK *only* matrox has a GDI+ acellerated card and I don't even know what
model it is.
--
Bob Powell [MVP]
Visual C#, System.Drawing
Find great Windows Forms articles in Windows Forms Tips and Tricks http://www.bobpowell.net/tipstricks.htm
Answer those GDI+ questions with the GDI+ FAQ http://www.bobpowell.net/faqmain.htm
All new articles provide code in C# and VB.NET.
Subscribe to the RSS feeds provided and never miss a new article.
"main(){};" <it**********@hotmails.com> wrote in message
news:O6**************@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl... The case of supporting GDI+ by hardware is quiet absord. How should i
expect my costumers to buy the latest graphic cards (or update their drivers)
while the applications with GDI* drawings commonly don't have purposes of their
DX counterparts ( like heavy games). No one accepts to do so many system
changes for a simple (but neccessary) animation. Besides, i think it is
the duty of Microsoft to make thier GDI+ compatible with the common graphic
cards of the planet, because GDI+ is a very common technology and more
people will use it than DX.
"James Westgate" <ja***********@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
news:uk**************@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl... The base problem is whereas the old GDI was graphics card accelerated
GDI+ isn't. The "bonus" is that if you can get acceptable performance, you
can get it on any PC. With some knowledge of the system bottlenecks,
performance for business type of applications such as charting,
diagramming etc can be acceptable. For game type apps and large
animations etc, managed DX9 is the recommended route.
You seem to be concerned about a DX download/redistributable but keep in
mind that most users will also have to download .NET framework
redistibutable anyway.
James
--
Create interactive diagrams and flowcharts with ERM Diagram at
http://www.crainiate.net
Take the ERM Tour at http://www.flowchartcontrol.com
"**ham" <fr****@hotmails.com> wrote in message
news:el**************@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...I know that's an old dirty issue; GDI+ almost -the slowest part of the
framework - has bothered many developers using it in animations. Even
in managed C++ the performance is awful.
Now, any dude out there does know any thing about this issue in VS 2005
+ .NET 2.0 ? Has Microsoft solved this performance problem, or we will
have to
again stick to that DX for simple animations in our applications?
( and since Microsoft doesn't support DDraw any more, and also because
managed DX9 SDK is unimaginable for download -200mb - via modem, we
have to
really stick to the old DX7, which many users don't have, and which
makes our application quiet big in size.)
Thank for help
It isn't absurd to support GDI+ in hardware at all. It *isn't*
supported by most, which is why it is slow on most machines. If it were
supported in hardware, it would be faster. There wouldn't be any change
to existing machine's current performance.
Times change, and so does technology. Sometimes, in order to move
forward, you'll have to sacrifice backwards compatibility. Look at what
Apple did with MacOS X, it seems to be working out quite well for them.
main(){}; wrote: The case of supporting GDI+ by hardware is quiet absurd. How should I expect
my costumers to buy the latest graphic cards (or update their drivers) while
the applications with GDI* drawings commonly don't have purposes of their DX
counterparts ( like heavy games). No one accepts to do so many system
changes for a simple (but necessary) animation. Besides, I think it is the
duty of Microsoft to make their GDI+ compatible with the common graphic
cards of the planet, because GDI+ is a very common technology and more
people will use it than DX.
( i wonder if they have already done this for their framework....Mac. is the
case)
"James Westgate" <ja***********@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
news:uk**************@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
The base problem is whereas the old GDI was graphics card accelerated GDI+
isn't. The "bonus" is that if you can get acceptable performance, you can
get it on any PC. With some knowledge of the system bottlenecks,
performance for business type of applications such as charting,
diagramming etc can be acceptable. For game type apps and large animations
etc, managed DX9 is the recommended route.
You seem to be concerned about a DX download/redistributable but keep in
mind that most users will also have to download .NET framework
redistibutable anyway.
James
--
Create interactive diagrams and flowcharts with ERM Diagram at
http://www.crainiate.net
Take the ERM Tour at http://www.flowchartcontrol.com
"**ham" <fr****@hotmails.com> wrote in message
news:el**************@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
I know that's an old dirty issue; GDI+ almost -the slowest part of the
framework - has bothered many developers using it in animations. Even in
managed C++ the performance is awful.
Now, any dude out there does know any thing about this issue in VS 2005 +
.NET 2.0 ? Has Microsoft solved this performance problem, or we will have
to
again stick to that DX for simple animations in our applications?
( and since Microsoft doesn't support DDraw any more, and also because
managed DX9 SDK is unimaginable for download -200mb - via modem, we have
to
really stick to the old DX7, which many users don't have, and which makes
our application quiet big in size.)
Thank for help
"Mike Newton" <MN*****@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:uQ**************@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl... It isn't absurd to support GDI+ in hardware at all. It *isn't* supported
by most, which is why it is slow on most machines. If it were supported
in hardware, it would be faster. There wouldn't be any change to existing
machine's current performance.
Times change, and so does technology. Sometimes, in order to move
forward, you'll have to sacrifice backwards compatibility. Look at what
Apple did with MacOS X, it seems to be working out quite well for them.
How many of our customers came crying up until about a year ago about our
stuff not working under OS 9? :-)
MOST of them believed us when we told them it was a decision Apple made, and
that we didn't think it was worth developing backwards, but I know a LOT of
people didn't upgrade for years because popular apps wouldn't run under OS
X. MS has always made backwards compatibility important to it, rightly or
wrongly, and that doesn't look like changing any time soon.
Steve This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion. Similar topics
by: James dean |
last post by:
From what i have read and seen the JIT compiler is very efficient and
only compiles that code that it needs at runtime therefore it helps, not
hinders performance. Does the JIT compiler make Gdi+...
|
by: James dean |
last post by:
I have heard that the video drivers in GDI+ are a big performance issue.
But is this only an issue with something like Games Programming i
think...is this wrong?. What about a drawing application...
|
by: James dean |
last post by:
Could someone explain how this works. I think the graphics card is used
to do blitting and drawing shapes like rectangles. How does it draw
using the Graphics card on the PC and why is this feature...
|
by: |
last post by:
We create VC++ programs that does some GDI drawing functionality.
I discovered GDI+ and this seems to be a big step forward, and appears to be
standard available in Windows XP and Windows Server...
|
by: Phillip N Rounds |
last post by:
I have an application which is heavily graphics intensive, all the graphics
being custom.
Scattered throughout by app, I have
MyView->OnDraw( this->GetDC() );
Apparently, each call to ...
|
by: **ham |
last post by:
I know that's an old dirty issue; GDI+ almost -the slowest part of the
framework - has bothered many developers using it in animations. Even in
managed C++ the performance is awful.
Now, any dude...
|
by: David Lozzi |
last post by:
Howdy,
I have a function that uploads an image and that works great. I love ..Nets built in upload, so much easier than 3rd party uploaders!
Now I am making a public function that will take the...
|
by: Marcin Rzeznicki |
last post by:
Hello,
Do you think it is legitimate practice to mix GDI+ and GDI calls (via
Get/ReleaseHDC()) in paint event of a control? I've heard there is
possibility of performance loss while "locking"...
|
by: James Wong |
last post by:
Hi everybody,
I'm facing a serious trouble relating to GDI+ generic error. The error
message is "A Generic error occured in GDI+" and the following information
is stored in Excepton object:...
|
by: Naresh1 |
last post by:
What is WebLogic Admin Training?
WebLogic Admin Training is a specialized program designed to equip individuals with the skills and knowledge required to effectively administer and manage Oracle...
|
by: Arjunsri |
last post by:
I have a Redshift database that I need to use as an import data source. I have configured the DSN connection using the server, port, database, and credentials and received a successful connection...
|
by: WisdomUfot |
last post by:
It's an interesting question you've got about how Gmail hides the HTTP referrer when a link in an email is clicked. While I don't have the specific technical details, Gmail likely implements measures...
|
by: Matthew3360 |
last post by:
Hi,
I have been trying to connect to a local host using php curl. But I am finding it hard to do this. I am doing the curl get request from my web server and have made sure to enable curl. I get a...
|
by: Oralloy |
last post by:
Hello Folks,
I am trying to hook up a CPU which I designed using SystemC to I/O pins on an FPGA.
My problem (spelled failure) is with the synthesis of my design into a bitstream, not the C++...
|
by: Carina712 |
last post by:
Setting background colors for Excel documents can help to improve the visual appeal of the document and make it easier to read and understand. Background colors can be used to highlight important...
|
by: BLUEPANDA |
last post by:
At BluePanda Dev, we're passionate about building high-quality software and sharing our knowledge with the community. That's why we've created a SaaS starter kit that's not only easy to use but also...
|
by: Rahul1995seven |
last post by:
Introduction:
In the realm of programming languages, Python has emerged as a powerhouse. With its simplicity, versatility, and robustness, Python has gained popularity among beginners and experts...
|
by: jack2019x |
last post by:
hello, Is there code or static lib for hook swapchain present?
I wanna hook dxgi swapchain present for dx11 and dx9.
| |
