AGX 1500: Map service rendering performance in AGX 1500 "2D" mode versus ArcMap

[danan]

It takes ArcGIS Explorer 1500 significantly longer to render the same set of AGS 9.3.1 map services in 2D mode than it takes ArcMap 9.3.1 to render the same services. Everything for both is at the same map scale and geographic areas on the same PC. Informally, we've noticed the same map services-based screen refresh can take 2.5 seconds in ArcMap and twice as long (or longer) in ArcGIS Explorer.

Some questions:

Q1) Is the slower refresh with AGX 1500 predominantly due to the code base having its origins in ArcGlobe and not ArcMap?

Q2) Are there any parameters that can be tweaked in AGX 1500 to increase the refresh / rendering rate so it more closely approximates the ArcMap refresh / rendering rate? In ArcMap, you don't have the flashy sliding / skidding refresh transitions. Could the transitioning be causing the slower rendering in AGX 1500?

Q3) What causes AGX 1500 to refresh its display in a manner where it appears it is rendering actual geometry when it couldn't possibly be? We're using dynamic and cached map services; so all AGX could be doing is stacking PNGs one atop the other. Is "progressive display" functionality causing this--and can it be turned off to increase rendering speed? I understand progressive display is meant to give the illusion of quicker response times, but I think we'd like to have the option of providing quicker, actual (not apparent) total response times.

Q4) Is AGX 1500 expected to have the same PNG/JPG rendering speed as ArcMap? I understand AGX 1500 is a lightweight Desktop client. It is not a replacement for ArcMap--so it is by definition less functional. But was ensuring that rendering speed (in 2D mode--we don't use 3D mode) be as fast as rendering the same services in ArcMap not a conscious design goal?

Q5) Are there plans to create parity between rendering map service speed in AGX 1500 and rendering map service speed in ArcMap?

To summarize, my main concern is that rendering the same map services (with same approximate scale and extent) in AGX 1500 is often considerably slower than the same rendering in ArcMap. Is it is on the AGX development team's radar to improve the rendering speed or should this be submitted as an enhancement request?

Have others observed the same performance differences between the same map services consumed in ArcGIS Explorer vs. ArcMap?

Thanks.

Dana

[danan]

Any thoughts?

If AGX 1500 isn't as performant as ArcMap when consuming 2D map services in 2D mode (at the same extents and scales), I'd like to be able to document this. It would be helpful to know the details of what accounts for the performance difference we've observed. It would also be helpful to know if the AGX team recognizes this a problem. Is a lightweight client like AGX capable in principle of achieving performance parity with ArcMap? And if so, is the team pursuing this as a goal for future releases?

[MichaelBranscomb]

Hi,

ArcMap has two different rendering modes - the first is the default rendering of the whole map image after an action. The other is when a "basemap" layer iscreated and then any layers in that basemap are enabled for seamless panning. It is this latter behaviour which is the approach taken in ArcGIS Explorer. Because the map images are streamed in and run through the enhanced drawing pipeline which enables the seamless panning, the time taken to fully render the same area of map can end up being slightly longer but the additional time is generally not noticeable and overall it's a better experience for the user because there is always content on screen and there is no whitespace. You'll also find that when revisiting the same area the time taken to render the map is usually negligible because the data has been cached locally. To ensure the cache is re-used you should save the Explorer map document you are working with.

Regarding your performance questions for future releases - the goal of every software release is to improve performance whilst enhancing functionality. The developers are always looking for ways to optimise the code/architecture and the work currently being undertaken will see advances in this area.

Regards

Mike