currently im taking a Master degree course in Computer Sciences, and i´d like to implement a Cellular Automata in WPF. The rendering performance must be enough to display
a lattice (grid) containing 200,000 cells.
Since updating visuals is very slow in WPF (due to the visual and logical tree), maybe it's better to use old good Picturebox (GDI+) to do the rendering and WPF to implement the rest of the software. A second option would be to use pixel shaders (HLSL), but i'dont know if WPF supports multi-pass shaders.
Let me know what you think.
First, check out the WriteableBitmap. The performance is decent, but nowhere near a shader can provide. I'm not exactly sure what kind of shaders are supported, but I'd think it wouldn't be limited...
Found this over on WindowsClient, it doesn't seem like multipass shaders are supported currently. Again, its probably just a matter of time and demand on that code; it may have been added since the article was written.
Somebody +1 me for not mentioning the Game of Life.
Related
I'm currently looking at writing a sound wave visualisation control for WPF. In fact it can render any sort of line graph data; it doesn't have to be a sound wave. As long as the data is a discrete set of samples it will render it.
I have it working; however the performance is not that desirable. I have done a lot of code optimisation to make the OnRender method work quickly. I've tested it with a profiler and it shows it runs at around 110ms, which should be fine.
However I'm seeing the application stall a lot and the profiler isn't showing why.
During my tests I've noticed it may have something to do with fill rate. By that I mean the number of pixels being drawn. My test data consists of a sin wave, at 41000hz over 20 seconds. This produces 812000 samples. Now my control optimises this data depending on the zoom scale the user is viewing the wave at. The entire wave will be drawn using around 6000 lines draws.
If I zoom a long way into the wave so I only render two full sin waves, I still do around 6000 line draws. The CPU time is around the same, at 110ms but the application is smooth and doesn't stall, which seemed strange at first.
However when looking at it the full wave draw touches almost every pixel. The chart draws a green line, which when zoomed out overwrite the entire background of the graph control. When zoomed all the way in only a small amount the background is overdrawn.
I work as a game programmer so I recognise this issue could be caused by fill rate limits. If the line draw is touching every pixel then it becomes slow to draw, irrespective of the number of line draws. However I would not expect this to be the case as the graph isn’t that large on screen. If I change the size of the window then it does get slower, which again reinforces by guess at fill rate issues. A modern graphics card should be able to handle this so maybe the control is using software rendering. I'm not sure how I can prove that!!
So my OnRender method is pretty optimised as far as the logic goes. In both of the above cases the time it takes to draw, on the CPU, doesn't change much. However in some cases there is a terrible lag of around one second if a lot of pixels are touched.
Does anyone know how I could improve this?
One way I have considered is to render an off screen texture on another thread and once complete, then call InvalidateVisual once the texture has been updated. I could also do the invalidation every so often so the graph rendering updates over time, rather than just suddenly appears.
Anyone have experience of this sort of thing and how do I actually profile the internals of WPF?
Does anyone know a profiler that will show me what is actually causing this, but as I said I think it maybe down to the actually hardware render and a fill rate problem.
Just to note, my graph control inherits from Canvas and the line draw is done using StreamGeometryContext. I also freeze the geometry and all the brushes and pens.
Thanks
I write software that needs to graph large amounts of frequency sprectrum data very fast. WPF's retained graphics system isn't very good for drawing (graphing) large amounts of data that is changing frequently. We use D3D9 to draw our graphs. WPF provides a way to get this into their rendering system through the D3DImage class where it can become an ImageBrush. Thus, it avoids problems relating to airspace restrictions at the cost of a little performance, but will still be much faster than rendering with WPF objects.
There are also two very good graphing libraries that I have seen out there that have different pros/cons.
SciChart is actually a software based rendering charting tool for WPF but has good performance.
Lightning Chart Uses DirectX (Via SlimDX library which is a managed .NET wrapper) and is extremely performance oriented.
Regarding your question about software rendering... The WPF Performance Suite has profiling tools and overlays that can show which portions of your application are being software rendered. You may want to download it from Microsoft and give it a try.
From what I've read, WPF's rendering system is hardly optimal (A Critical Deep Dive into the WPF Rendering System). For what WPF is designed for, it is great, but it has its limits as well.
My recommendation is that if you have experience in game development and DirectX, and you need a method to graph larger amounts of data quickly, to look through interop with D3D via the D3DImage class in WPF.
In our WPF application, we have a need to display about 64 real-time level meters for an audio application. The tests we've thrown at WPF, even when rendering basic primitives as efficiently as we can still show it to be nowhere near where our application needs to be, often times bogging down the main thread so much to the point that it's non-responsive to input.
As such, we have to go with something more optimized for graphics performance such as DirectX (via SlimDX or SharpDX) or OpenGL/ES (via Atlas which converts it to DirectX calls.)
My question is if it's possible to create multiple, small DirectX-based areas, each representing an individual meter, or for that matter, is that even the right approach? I was under the understanding that you have to run it as at a minimum, the entire window, not a portion thereof.
The issues I see with the latter are airspace issues wherein you can't have WPF content in front of DirectX content in the same window, and we really don't want to have to redo all of our controls in DirectX since for the other non-meter 95% of our UI WPF is great!
I have read that you can render DirectX to a brush, then use that inside WPF, or using the WriteableBitmap class which gives you direct access to the buffers WPF then uses in its Render thread, both of which don't seem to suffer from the Airspace issues, but that seems we'd be right back at the same place with WPF being the bottleneck since it still has to do the rendering.
We are of course going to dedicate a few weeks to sample applications testing all of the above, but I'm wondering if I'm even headed in the right direction, and/or if there are any caveats we can avoid by talking to people with experience doing something like this to avoid common pitfalls, etc. As such, any comments will be appreciated.
I'm hoping we can perhaps even start a wiki somewhere to discuss this topic as it seems to be a popular one, albeit spread all over the place making it hard for new entrants to get the information they seek.
With wpf / d3d interop, You should always try to create the smallest number of interop calls. So you should prefer rendering all 64 level meters in a single render target (also it allows you to batch your primitive rendering and draw everything in the smallest number of gpu calls).
you should try to use the D3DImage API that allows you to share your own D3D texture with the wpf renderer.
If WPF can't really handle these 64 moving bars, you could go with a single D3DImage and use Direct3D9 for rendering all bars at once directly to it. For your specific scenario, you shouldn't have any performance problem.
I'm currently in the early stages of a project and have difficulty deciding which framework to use. I hear people say WPF is dead, yet it seems to be the (only?) way to program a Microsoft Surface app. This is one of the possible future aims of the project, but not the main focus.
The main focus however is: both 2d and 3d objects in the same view (and kinect/voice support). Some of the 2d objects are SVG files. From what I have read online so far it's not easy to render SVG graphics in XNA (nor Silverlight 5 3D for that matter). I've seen some SVG to XAML converters, but could the result of this be used in a 3d view? Or vice versa?
Considering it's not going to be a game, but a business application I'm tempted to rule out XNA, but then again I also require good performance as there will be quite some graphical stuff going on and if possible support for high resolutions/video wall. Taking a video wall into consideration would maybe rule out WPF as I've read that it will only use hardware acceleration if the resolution is lower than the texture size limit of the GPU.
There is no intend to run the application in the browser or phone, as such i'm tempted to rule out Silverlight 5.
Any tips would be greatly be appreciated.
Thanks!
I wouldn't rule out XNA on the basis that it's "for games". You can simply use only the parts required for hardware-accelerated 3D rendering and ignore the rest. This is in fact what Silverlight 5 does!
So you may find that your 3D rendering code is the same between XNA and SL5 in any case.
Here is a question about SVG in XNA. Basically answer is: you have to write your own hardware-accelerated SVG renderer - a stupidly difficult task. But if your SVG files never change, you could just use an existing software renderer to render them to a texture.
If you converted your SVG to XAML, you would have to render it to a texture to use it in a SL5 3D view anyway (unless it's an overlay). So there is no big win there. I don't know how 2D-3D compositing works in WPF.
Your decision really depends on whether you would find the built-in functionality that SL5 or WPF provides for user interfaces useful? Seeing as you are basically making your own user interface, you probably would not get much use from the provided 2D interface.
The 3D API that SL5 provides is basically a cut-down version of XNA. The 3D API for WPF looks like it just renders models for you - it does not seem to buy you much over XNA. If you have a compelling reason to use XAML, then WPF may be a good choice. Otherwise I'd go with XNA.
After reading the wikipedia article on WPF architecture, I am a bit confused with the benefits that WPF will offer me. (wikipedia is not a good research reference, but i found it useful). I have some questions
1) WPF uses d3d surfaces to render. However, the scenegraph is rendered into the d3d surface by the media integrated layer, which runs on the CPU. Is this true ?
2) I just found out by asking a question here that bitmaps dont use native resources. Does this mean that if i use alot of images, the MIL will copy each when rendering, rather than storing the bitmaps on the video card as a texture ?
3) The article mentions that WPF uses the painters algorithm which is back to front. Thats painfully slow. Is there any rational why WPF omits using Z-buffering and rendering front to back ? I am guessing its because the simplest way to handle transparency, but it seems weak.
The reason i ask is that i am thinking it wont be wise for me to put hundreds of buttons on a screen even though my colleagues are saying its directx accelerated. I dont quite believe that whole directx accelerated bit about WPF. I used to work on video games and my memory of writing d3d and opengl code tells me to be cautious.
For questions #1 and #3 you might want to check out this section of the SDK that discusses the Visual class and how it's rendering instructions are exchanged between the higher level framework and the media integration layer (MIL). It also discusses why the painters algorithm is used.
For #2, no that is most definitely not the case. The bitmap data will be moved to the hardware and cached there.
I tested that, I wrote two programs that show 1,000 buttons on screen, one in WinForms and one in WPF, both worked just fine.
I then pushed that up to 10,000 buttons, at that point the WPF app took a few seconds to start but run just fine, the WinForms app didn't start.
Win32 itself (and WinForms) isn't built for applications with hundreds of controls (believe me I wrote such an app), at some point it just stops working, WPF on the other hand, keeps working even if it slows down a bit at some point.
So, if you do need to put a lot of controls on screen WPF is your best bet (unless you want to roll your own UI framework - and you think you can do better than the entire MS perf team).
Also, WPF has many advantages other than graphics acceleration: richer graphics, drawing model that is easier to work with, animations, 3d and my personal favorite - amazing data-binding.
This will let you develop richer UIs faster - and I think that will make a much bigger difference than the painting algorithm used.
BTW, if you need to put hundreds of buttons on the screen this is likely to be a bad user experience and you may want to reconsider your UI design,
Approaching Silverlight development is a rather daunting task as it seems to require a rather different mindset to work I have done in the past.
I have been working on it for several months and we have already released an application that presents form-based pages. So I have the basics of XAML for layout but what I need to do now is move into graphically representing data. For example transform a list of objects representing vehicle speed recordings into a line graph of speed. I am at a loss on what the best way is to approach this.
Can anyone point me to articles or tutorials that present this kind of thing?
Your first port of call for Silverlight learning should be the official site http://silverlight.net/Learn/
If you want to do any data visualization/charting then first try the Silverlight Toolkit on codeplex. It's fantastic if you want to get anything up and running quickly.
Also check out Delay's Blog on charting and the chartbuilder code
Bang your head against it for 3-6 months. That's how I did it and it's worked out pretty well so far.
But seriously, the learning curve sucks.
There's charting libraries for Silverlight out there, you could grab one of those but I wouldn't waste money on it. It's relatively easy to write this kind of code yourself.
All you really need is a DrawingVisual. Once you have that you can render what you need on to it's surface. The trick is to make sure that you have sufficient layout information when you render. Because this is vector graphics, you can use the ScaleTransform to match your content bounds instead of repainting on size changed. Other than that, you'll wanna host your DrawingVisual in a UIFrameworkElement and let the dimension of that object govern where and how you draw your data. This will give you all the layout goodness of WPF/Silverlight.
For drawing there are plenty of Geometry classes you can rely on but there's one thing that you'll wanna do and that's to adjust the level of detail in your data points with respect to your drawing. This is the number one trick to make sure you don't hog the CPU.
Avoid drawing more than one data point per pixel. If you have a lot of data points, and a small drawing surface you can use a rolling average to smooth the result.
If you approach this with the above things in mind you should be able to write a flexible graph UI element that you can visualize data with, in no time at all.
I did this in a WPF application, I'm pretty much assuming that you can do the exact same thing with Silverlight 2.0, you'll just yell at me if you cant?