How to learn the identity of the graphics card?
chien.yang at oracle.com
Wed Aug 6 18:17:35 UTC 2014
Yes, we know that it is a perfectly fine entry level GPU capable of
supporting JavaFX graphics requirements. I shouldn't use the word "bad"
card. What I'm saying is that you will have to add it to your blacklist
if you don't want JavaFX to use it for rendering due to poor framerate.
On 8/6/2014 9:57 AM, Mike Hearn wrote:
> The card isn't bad per se, it's just the HD4000 integrated graphics
> chip that older MacBook's ship with. It's just that I'm very picky
> about my framerates :)
> On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 6:49 PM, Chien Yang <chien.yang at oracle.com
> <mailto:chien.yang at oracle.com>> wrote:
> There isn't a public Java API support for what you want to do.
> However if you are willing to patch JavaFX in your own build, you
> can add the bad card to the GLGPUInfo blackList in the GLFactory
> class of the specific platform if you are using the es2 pipe. You
> will need to dig down into the native C++ code if you need to
> support Windows d3d pipe. This will be a little more work see
> D3DBadHardware.h for the entries. Hope this helps.
> - Chien
> On 8/5/2014 11:39 PM, Peter Penzov wrote:
> Hi All,
> I'm interested how I can get the model of the GPU card
> using Java. Can
> you show me some basic example?
> On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 3:02 AM, Jim Graham
> <james.graham at oracle.com <mailto:james.graham at oracle.com>> wrote:
> If there is a card that can't keep up with what we want it
> to do then we
> should probably be dealing with that on our end as well,
> whether by
> disabling 3D on that card or by black listing it and just
> falling back to
> sw pipeline. We already do that with a number of embedded
> On 8/1/14 2:27 AM, Mike Hearn wrote:
> Scott is correct about the determining of the SW
> pipeline. To add to
> if knowing whether you are running on SW is sufficient
> Unfortunately for the Intel HD4000 card that some
> older laptops have, it
> technically supports 3D but struggles to do basic
> shader effects at 60fps
> when running at high pixel densities. I think I posted
> about this problem
> before. Simpler animations work better (just) but I'd
> prefer to only fall
> back to that when necessary.
> I think the suggestion about starting out assuming
> that animation will be
> OK and then backing off is a good one, if it is
> practical for your
> Given that I'll be bundling a JVM with the app anyway
> I think it'd be
> easier and give a better UX to just patch JavaFX to
> expose this data using
> an API specific to my app. It obviously has it because
> when running with
> Prism debug logging the info is printed.
More information about the openjfx-dev