I've never been able to understand the best practice in this context. I usually want to ship my game with as minimum size as possible. So whereever possible, I try to use scaling of my graphics. Let's suppose I have to draw a 1000 X 300 px wall of yellow color in my game. So I usually just use a 3 X 3 px yellow image and stretch it in game (using nearest neighbor filter). Is this the right approach?

Let us consider another situation. Let's suppose I wish to render rain in my game. Basically 2 X 30 px blue white gradient streaks . Let us suppose at any time 200 drops max are going to be rendered . Now if I just ship a 2 X 6 px streak with the game and scale it at runtime , will it affect performance?

In short, how does scaling affect performance in OpenGL?

  • \$\begingroup\$ Please do not take the habit of posting your question on multiple SE sites: stackoverflow.com/questions/25287807/scaling-and-performance \$\endgroup\$ Commented Aug 13, 2014 at 13:48
  • \$\begingroup\$ I am sorry , but I am not sure where will I get better answer for my question . This being a gamedev QA site is better suited for this question but as you can see, I am getting more response on the on stackoverflow \$\endgroup\$ Commented Aug 13, 2014 at 13:52
  • \$\begingroup\$ This question appears to be off-topic because it is a intra-network cross post. Please delete your question on the other site if you want it reopened here. \$\endgroup\$
    – user1430
    Commented Aug 13, 2014 at 16:55
  • \$\begingroup\$ @JoshPetrie But don't you think many people are going to stumble on stackoverflow for getting solution of the same problem . After reading your comment I straight went to SO for deleting the question but seeing activity on it I thought I ll do bad to many others .Isn't it? \$\endgroup\$ Commented Aug 13, 2014 at 21:44
  • \$\begingroup\$ Perhaps, but the StackExchange network is about creating collections of questions and their canonical answers; cross-posting works against that purpose. \$\endgroup\$
    – user1430
    Commented Aug 14, 2014 at 1:08

1 Answer 1


I'm don't have any sources confirming it, but as far as I've tested till now, that approach provides better performance compared to using a texture of that size.

I suspect the reason for getting better performance is the fact that with smaller texture there is less memory loopups gpu needs in order to render the texture, while it's still doing all the calculations needed to compute both texture coordinate (per texel) and fragment position.


Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .