Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

4

Take a look at these requirements published for a recent FPS game: • OS: Windows 7 64-Bit / Windows 8 64-Bit • Intel® Core 2 Duo E8200 2.66 GHZ / AMD Phenom X3 8750 2.4 GHZ or better Recommended: Intel® Core i5 – 680 @ 3.6GHz • RAM: 6 GB RAM Recommended: 8 GB RAM • HDD: 40GB HD space • NVIDIA GeForce GTX GTS 450 / ATI® Radeon HD ...


4

Whenever a frame is rendered, your graphic card must translate the coordinate in 3-dimensional space of every polygon corner (aka vertex) to the two-dimensional space on the monitor. This is done by multiplying each vertex with a projection matrix which represents the current position, angle and field-of-view of the camera. Only after this is done, the ...


2

Before anything, I'd look for a heap profiler and make sure it's the GC that's causing problems. However, if you find that it is indeed the number of objects you have in memory, you've already come up with the basic solution; page your chunks out to disk once in a while and only keep nearby ones in memory. But, as you've seen, there are problems with the ...


2

Yes, doing several draw calls is slower than one. This is why state changes are expensive. There are techniques (like instancing) that fight this, but they're still more expensive than simply doing a single draw call. To combine several VBOs into one, they must have the same state (i.e, same shader, same textures, etc), and they must be static (i.e, not ...


2

I doubt the string concatenation is the culprit here, but you could always use the transform CSS property, which is supported in almost every recent browser. Since most CSS transforms also use px values (for example: translate), you should use raw matrix coordinates. So to offset an element by say x: 10px, y: 20px you would use: transform: matrix(1, 0, 0, ...


2

Yes, there are many performance implications to consider even when two objects share the same amount of geometry. Fragments that fail a Z-buffer test will not invoke fragment shaders. The amount of screen-space that the objects occupy will impact performance, as fill-rate is a big deal especially on mobile devices. If you have large triangles that are ...


1

Last time I was looking at benchmarks for this (quite some time ago), Texture2D.FromStream was actually faster than Content.Load<Texture2D>. The overwhelmingly slowest part of the process, it turns out, is transferring data from disk. When using Texture2D.FromStream, you can load a PNG or JPEG file. These file formats use image-specific data ...


1

Increasing polygon count has performance impact in few key areas: There is a limit that GPU can issue new triangles (e.g. 4 per clock), normally 1 per Shader Engine (AMD) / Graphics Processing Cluster (NVIDIA). If your GPU runs at 1GHz and has 4 SE's/GPC's that puts absolute peak limit of 4 billion triangles per second on the GPU - normally not a ...


1

Like Phillip said one should always optimize your models for a specific goal. That said, i want to add some extra info on the creation of 3D models. Nowadays the polygons are not the bottleneck but texture space is. Since we bake so much into the texture for details (think: Diffuse, normal, occlusion, light, etc) and a top notch graphics card can only store ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible