   PBuffers vs glCopyTexSubImage2D
  I changed my render-to-texture routines to PBuffers (via WGL)as this is supposed to improve performance, but my tests show that it is actually slower than using glCopyTexSubImage2D.Does this mean I''m doing something wrong, or will the speeduponly occur on newer gfx cards?I have a GForce3Ti200 and the latest nVidia drivers.Cheers, 
  I don''t think the actual polygon rendering will be any faster or slower, but if you use it as a render texture, you can avoid the copy, and so it could be faster. The thing that probably makes it slow is the context switch, but as the texture get''s larger, the copy might be a bigger hit than the context switch. If you only want to render a small texture, it''s probably the best to just use the back buffer, but for larger textures, a pbuffer as render texture might be a better idea.You can also use pbuffer that shares the context of the main render target, but then it must be of the same pixel format as the main render target.   My Site;  It seems you''re right. I am rendering very small textures (32^2)and the context switch does take a lot of time. There is a slight performance hit during polygon rendering as well when using pbuffer-textures. Not something you''d notice outside a benchmark, though.I guess pbuffers wasn''t the magic bullet either ;-) 