Open kuldip-wagh opened 3 months ago
I would expect that the volume sample performance itself is the same (after all, OSPRay uses VKL for that). But OSPRay's renderer support much more features and flexibility (geometry, clipping, multiple volumes, AOVs, ...), which comes with some toll compared to VKL examples (which only handles a single volume). Then, let's make sure to compare apples to apples, i.e.
density_pathtracer_ispc
with OSPRay pathtracer
rendererray_march_iterator_ispc
with OSPRay scivis
rendererStill, in the end it will come down to the additional overhead in OSPRay due to it's features.
Ohhk. Thanks for the reply @johguenther
I used same unstructured data with OpenVKL examples.exe and with OSPRay examples.exe. I saw that OpenVKL volume performs much better than ospray (w.r.t FPS). Does anyone know why is that and how to fix it ?