It’s not “normal” (as in not a lot of people are doing this) but it is the best way to go in terms of efficiency for some things.

If it is for the HUD and, as you say, static objects, yes, this is best.

For moving objects, you would have to convert from pixel coordinates to normalized screen coordinates manually on the CPU, which will likely be slower to do than on the GPU, especially for batch rendering.

For your case of static objects, omitting the matrix transform (which just transforms things into -1 to 1 anyway) is the best way to go.  Not only does it save on cycles but also on bandwidth, as there is less to send to the shaders.

L. Spiro

It’s not “normal” but it is the best way to go in terms of efficiency for some things.

If it is for the HUD and, as you say, static objects, yes, this is best.

For moving objects, you would have to convert from pixel coordinates to normalized screen coordinates manually on the CPU, which will likely be slower to do than on the GPU, especially for batch rendering.

For your case of static objects, omitting the matrix transform (which just transforms things into -1 to 1 anyway) is the best way to go.  Not only does it save on cycles but also on bandwidth, as there is less to send to the shaders.

L. Spiro

It’s not “normal” but it is the best way to go in terms of efficiency for some things.

If it is for the HUD and, as you say, static objects, yes, this is best.

For moving objects, you would have to convert from pixel coordinates to normalized screen coordinates manually on the CPU, which will likely be slower to do than on the GPU, especially for batch rendering.

For your case of static objects, omitting the matrix transform (which just transforms things into -1 to 1 anyway) is the best way to go.

L. Spiro