Wearing AO is better than Sexy walk attachment

It is surprising after trying reducing the rendering costs on my friend's low power configuration. It is a computer with P4 CPU and low end graphic card. Rendering cost is the indexing figure for the assessing the power need to rendering an avatar, such as pure avatar costing 1, extra 1 prim cost another one. As to a hair, usually costs around 120-200. An avatar with texture clothes, hair and shoes may between 500-1000. If have jewellaries, bags and other top-ons can reach to 4000.

What was surpriced me is that sexy walk attachment need 88 rendering cost. Sexy walk is a freebie can see everywhere in SL. Some of them is within AO, but most them is sell as attachment at 1L. It seem out of scale to wearing sexy walk attachment if you want to have a light weight avatar. For rendering, AO it zero rendering costs as it is attached to screen rather rezzing in-world. Alternative solution is better to wearing AO, even only put single sexy walk inside it.

You can examine your costs follow the picture to enable it. You will see the costs above you head immediately.

Hi to anyone using AO in Second Life

This is a blog for supporting Natural Expression Animation in-world. And, the most I wish is to share the experience of using animation in Second Life.