> To add a little perspective, you might look at the performance of a
> similar system. In VG.net (a vector graphics system based on GDI+) there
> is a sample called Scalability. Using version 2.3 (beta), a 1.7 GHz P4,
> creation time for rectangles:

> 10K:   0.01 seconds
> 100K: 0.10 seconds

> Peak memory consumption during 100% animation of every rectangle, by
> constantly changing their location:

> 10K:   16MB
> 100K: 23MB

> Virtual memory usage is smaller, and memory usage is lower with no
> animation. Considering that the application consumed 9MB before any
> objects were created, simply displaying the test control panel, I think
> that is fairly efficient.

> Avalon is not even in beta yet. After all the performance testing and
> tuning it will probably work a bit better. But there are some fundamental
> low level data structures and techniques in Avalon that look unscalable to
> me, so I don't think the integrated retained mode system will be useful
> for CAD, GIS, and certain types of SCADA  vector graphics.

> Regards,
> Frank Hileman

> check out VG.net: http://www.vgdotnet.com
> Animated vector graphics system
> Integrated Visual Studio .NET graphics editor

> "Lei Jiang" <c...@263.net> wrote in message
> news:O4%23g%23342EHA.936@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>>I did a simple test just now : add 10000 ellipses and 10000 line segments
>>to
>> a canvas. This simple program cost about 90MB memory!( and costs 7s)

>> 308MB when 50000 ellipse and 50000 line segments added. (costs 43s)

>> Another problem is of hardware accecelating. I checked my DirectX
>> settings
>> (using dxdiag.exe) and found that the DirectDraw and Direct3D is disabled
>> on
>> my computer(Win2003). After I turned the hardware accecelating on and
>> enable
>> the DirectDraw/Direct3D. The same test cost more time! For the first
>> test,
>> it cost 12s, the second cost 70s. Is the software rendering faster than
>> hardware accecelating??