I know this question has been asked before, but in view of .NET 4.0 and the improvements that have gone into making WPF more performant, does the community think that performance is no longer a criteria for choosing one technology over another.
A:
You mean WPF vs GDI(+). There is still nothing faster than win exe produced by compiling GDI+C code.
DBJDBJ
2010-06-05 00:29:52
Huh? 1. GDI+ is **not** the same as WinForms: WinForms adds a lot of code on top of GDI+. 2. WPF is often much **faster than GDI+** for anything but basic pixel-based 2D drawing because it fully utilizes the GPU to do its drawing whereas GDI+ does not. 3. You are only considering screen update performance and ignore WPF's speed advantages over WinForms due to its data binding.
Ray Burns
2010-06-05 01:00:50
1 :: I tried in 5 seconds I had to explain that WinForm and WPF comparisons is apples and pears comparison. Did you not got that Ray ?2 :: WPF+GPU : *if* there is an GPU that WPF want's to use the speed advantage might be true. I still claim WTL written code produces faster Windows UI than any other.3 :: What are you going on about ?What is stopping M$FT to very quickly refactor WinForms to use WPF ?
DBJDBJ
2010-08-22 07:52:22
+3
A:
Overall WPF now performs significantly better than equivalent WinForms code in most scenarios, due to several architectural advantages of WPF over WinForms:
- Better use of the GPU
- Retained mode rendering
- More efficient data binding
- More efficient object tree construction
- More efficient RAM usage (using DependencyObject)
- Smaller program code
However both perform sufficiently fast that I don't think performance will be the big reason to choose WPF over WinForms. It will be the ability to create better applications faster.
Game developers and others who need ultimate performance won't be using WPF or WinForms for the critical portions of their UI: They will be programming to Direct3D or even to the hardware.
Ray Burns
2010-06-05 01:09:52