Unreadable dimensions

SW2005 SP0, W2K+SP4, ATI Radeon 8500(R200).
I'm completely new to SW and have just started to work through the
tutorials. Everything seems to be OK except that dimensions are almost
totally unreadable. They look about the correct size, but are very faint
and appear to be broken up as if pixels are missing. If you know what
they are its _almost_ possible to read them, but not quite. Everything
else is nice and clear, just like the examples, but the dimensions are
useless. Any idea what the problem is, or how to fix it? - changing the
graphics card is not really an option.

 

Unfortunately, we have seen the same thing here when we tried using Radeon
cards. They work ok for a lot of the stuff, but then flake out here and
there. You might try turning on Software OpenGL just to see if it helps.
To do that, open SW with no documents open. Go to Tools/Options/Performance
and check the box.

WT

 

Wooding

Lose the Radeon card. Even a cheap PNY FX500 would be a massive improvement.


Mark

 

Thanks Wayne,
That did the trick - with no apparent performance hit, so far.

 

Once you start getting into more complex work, you should start to see a big
performance hit. Running Software OpenGL means that your CPU is doing a
bunch of work that your card normally does.

You might also check out performance in different modes, say in wireframe or
with edges shown in shaded.

I think you will eventually find that changing the video card is not the
worst of all possible options.

Jerry Steiger
Tripod Data Systems
"take the garbage out, dear"

 

The list of OpenGL features apparently supported by the card is shown
below. Do you know which ones are missing or not working properly?

OpenGL Features:
GL_ARB_multitexture Supported
GL_ARB_texture_border_clamp Supported
GL_ARB_texture_compression Supported
GL_ARB_texture_cube_map Supported
GL_ARB_texture_env_add Supported
GL_ARB_texture_env_combine Supported
GL_ARB_texture_env_crossbar Supported
GL_ARB_texture_env_dot3 Supported
GL_ARB_transpose_matrix Supported
GL_ARB_vertex_blend Supported
GL_ARB_window_pos Supported
GL_S3_s3tc Supported
GL_ATI_element_array Supported
GL_ATI_envmap_bumpmap Supported
GL_ATI_fragment_shader Supported
GL_ATI_map_object_buffer Supported
GL_ATI_pn_triangles Supported
GL_ATI_texture_mirror_once Supported
GL_ATI_vertex_array_object Supported
GL_ATI_vertex_streams Supported
GL_ATIX_texture_env_combine3 Supported
GL_ATIX_texture_env_route Supported
GL_ATIX_vertex_shader_output_point_size Supported
GL_EXT_abgr Supported
GL_EXT_bgra Supported
GL_EXT_blend_color Supported
GL_EXT_blend_func_separate Supported
GL_EXT_blend_minmax Supported
GL_EXT_blend_subtract Supported
GL_EXT_clip_volume_hint Supported
GL_EXT_compiled_vertex_array Supported
GL_EXT_draw_range_elements Supported
GL_EXT_fog_coord Supported
GL_EXT_packed_pixels Supported
GL_EXT_point_parameters Supported
GL_ARB_point_parameters Supported
GL_EXT_rescale_normal Supported
GL_EXT_secondary_color Supported
GL_EXT_separate_specular_color Supported
GL_EXT_stencil_wrap Supported
GL_EXT_texgen_reflection Supported
GL_EXT_texture_env_add Supported
GL_EXT_texture3D Supported
GL_EXT_texture_compression_s3tc Supported
GL_EXT_texture_cube_map Supported
GL_EXT_texture_edge_clamp Supported
GL_EXT_texture_env_combine Supported
GL_EXT_texture_env_dot3 Supported
GL_EXT_texture_lod_bias Supported
GL_EXT_texture_filter_anisotropic Supported
GL_EXT_texture_object Supported
GL_EXT_vertex_array Supported
GL_EXT_vertex_shader Supported
GL_KTX_buffer_region Supported
GL_NV_texgen_reflection Supported
GL_NV_blend_square Supported
GL_SGI_texture_edge_clamp Supported
GL_SGIS_texture_border_clamp Supported
GL_SGIS_texture_lod Supported
GL_SGIS_generate_mipmap Supported
GL_SGIS_multitexture Supported
GL_WIN_swap_hint Supported
WGL_EXT_extensions_string Supported
WGL_EXT_swap_control Supported

 

Gary,

It's not so much "what" OpenGL features are supported. It's "how" they are
implemented with repect to their intended purpose. OpenGL is a very feature
rich environment, and is used in CAD and games, but very differently. Both
the Radeon and Geforce are optimized for games. They use a segmented back
buffer for fast texture fill rate, with a low polygon count. The requirments
of CAD are exactly the opposite. Of the two, the Geforce is a better choice
for SW. Both can be hacked into their CAD equivalents (Quadro, FireGL), but
a real one is a better choice.

Regards

Mark