jstrecker's picture

Jaymie (@jstrecker)


  • Vuo Founder
  • Team Vuo
jstrecker's picture

iaian7 — Wow, thank you for sharing all of this information to help clarify the problem.

Why do you see lower performance (more skipped frames) when running a Vuo screen saver compared to running the same composition fullscreen from the Vuo editor?

I still haven't been able to reproduce this issue myself, which is perhaps an interesting data point. (MacBook Pro, Mid 2012 or Early 2013, NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M, macOS Sierra.)

I discussed with the team and we can't think of anything within Vuo that could cause a performance difference between running as a screen saver and running from the editor.

Could the OS be doing something that affects performance? For example: Do screensaver processes run at a lower priority than regular composition processes? Are they throttled in some way to limit the amount of resources they consume? Is there some other process that runs only when the screensaver is active or when the system is idle, that is using up resources? I don't know.

Why do you see this difference in Vuo but not in Quartz Composer?

This is comparing apples and oranges. Quartz Composer's graphics system works very differently from Vuo's. In addition to using GPU and CPU in different proportions, Vuo exercises GPU functionality that Quartz Composer does not. Vuo supports Retina resolution and multisampling; Quartz Composer does not.

What's the next step?

In the somewhat near future — after NDI nodes but before Windows support — we're planning to overhaul Vuo's graphics system (adding support for Metal since that is what Apple has moved to). That will probably fix a number of performance issues (and introduce some new ones to debug). Since we don't have any leads on why you're getting lower performance with screen savers, we'll see if the Metal upgrade fixes it.

jstrecker's picture
Jaymie commented on visiophone's Discussion, “Vuo 2.0.1 Crashing on Start Up

We just released Vuo 2.0.2 which fixes the problem.