Much shorter replay time

[Sunil Nakum]

Hi Jose,

Thank you for the clarification.

I understand, here the primary audience comprises of graphics developers,
what I'm trying to figure out is whether I can use it for
measuring/comparing graphics performance (in black-box manner). Please
correct me, if my approach for ApiTrace is not in right direction. I don't
have access to code and that's why I resorted for comparing FPS numbers by
replaying trace files, but as per your reply it is not designed to do that.
I've also tried diff-images option for two runs, that worked well but does
not indicate performance.

When you say replays are not good for FPS and it can be measured on actual
app, did you mean it by ApiTrace or application itself or by other means?
My application doesn't have this facility inbuilt thus looking for external
means. If ApiTrace can measure it on actual app, then surely I've missed
reading something from the documentation.

The app isn't slow, the object is to measure how slow/fast it is in one
environment as compared to others.

Thanks,
Sunil


On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 8:10 PM, José Fonseca <jose.r.fonseca at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Yes,  glretrace replays the trace as fast as it can, and not to the same
> rhythm as the original app.
>
> Replays are not suitable for measuring FPS.  You can easily do that on the
> actual app.  The purpose is to provide a magnifying glass into the graphics
> API.  This is  by design.
>
> If your app is slow due to something other than the graphics API then
> you'll need to investigate that using different tools (e.g, general
> profilers.)
>
> Jose
>
> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 12:54 PM, Sunil Nakum <sunil.nakum at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm from testing domain and it is my first attempt to test performance of
>> 3d product. As it's a propitiatory product, I wont be able to provide much
>> information on it though any questions are very welcomed.
>>
>> The tracing and replay though works well, but the replaying time reduces
>> to almost 3rd of the recording time. Suppose, I record the graphics
>> manipulation for 30 seconds the resulting trace file gets replayed in about
>> 10 seconds.
>>
>> To understand how ApiTrace behaves I performed following test, while
>> tracing I tried halting graphics manipulation for few seconds. The
>> resulting trace file when replayed does not show this halting effect for
>> appropriate time. So I'm thinking that ApiTrace sort of skips the time to
>> plot such frames (during which frames are not changing) and thus completes
>> replaying in much shorter time. Is that correct? Is is possible to have
>> exact same replay time as recorded while tracing?
>>
>> The problem with this fast replaying is that it gives much higher FPS
>> number (because of much lesser time) as compared to the actual clock time.
>>
>> Kindly ignore lack of terminologies in explaining it, as I'm not well
>> conversed with this technology.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Sunil
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> apitrace mailing list
>> apitrace at lists.freedesktop.org
>> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/apitrace
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/apitrace/attachments/20151203/b3507e9b/attachment.html>