max faces at good performace
Author
Hello everyone.
I'm a 3D modeler and I have a question for you all.
I wish to know what is the highest number of faces that a less-than-avarage video card and CPU can display on screen at 60FPS~.
Note that there's no scene management or render optimization; The program just draws all the faces with depth testing.
The faces are obviously all transformed from their model space, and they all are textured (without any multistage/multipass texturing effects).
please note that I add the following things:
1) Direct3D fixed function directional lights.
2) All models outside of the view frustrum are not rendered at all.
3) All of the faces are visible. That is, each face goes through all of the rendering pipline and will be completely drawn.
thanks in advance.
YoMan
[Edited by - YoMan on July 11, 2007 2:12:51 PM]
That really depends on what you consider less-than-average... Something that is also likely to change monthly, considering the constant evolution of graphics cards. I mean, are you talking Radeon 9250 bad, or Geforce 2 bad?
Yeah, something like GeForce 2. He's talking about a graphics card that was considered 'good enough' and 'affordable' for most people, about 3 years ago. In other words, a video card that if you compare it to what people have today, 95% will have better ones. It's just assuming the worst case, so he can know approximately how many faces can be used in a scene with no special optimizations, using PCs is considered one of those 5%.
There's not really a fixed number for this thing. It depends entirely on your renderer - to take an extreme example, drawing the models in immediate mode rather than as vertex buffers will be a lot slower. Depending on how the model transformations and the frustum culling work, those could affect performance too. The number of textures, and the size of them will probably have an impact of some sort. And if by "all of the faces are visible" you mean that back-face culling is disabled, that will affect performance too. If you're asking about rendering this as part of a game engine (rather than just a model viewer) then you have to take the other parts of the code into account too - The collision, physics, AI, audio, streaming, file access... All of those things will impact your framerate.
The best thing to do is to test your models by trying them out in the renderer. If the renderer can calculate frames per second, you should also be able to adapt the maths for that so that when you load (say) a 2000 poly character model, the renderer can tell you how many of those it could have onscreen whilst still managing 60FPS.
Ideally, you should be making all your models as low-poly as possible, whilst still making sure they look good onscreen. Just because a game CAN throw around X number of polys, doesn't mean that you SHOULD try to use that many if you can do it with less.
The best thing to do is to test your models by trying them out in the renderer. If the renderer can calculate frames per second, you should also be able to adapt the maths for that so that when you load (say) a 2000 poly character model, the renderer can tell you how many of those it could have onscreen whilst still managing 60FPS.
Ideally, you should be making all your models as low-poly as possible, whilst still making sure they look good onscreen. Just because a game CAN throw around X number of polys, doesn't mean that you SHOULD try to use that many if you can do it with less.
I remember working on GF2 GTS card some 6 yrs ago and I had scenes with over 120.000 triangles per frame, yet it was still smooth (terrain+objects+collision detection). Not sure about exact framerate, but surely in the range 30-60 (and sometimes even over 200, depending on current frustum).
Remember though, that GF2 doesn`t like resolution higher than 1024x768. 800x600x16 is the best compromise here.
Remember though, that GF2 doesn`t like resolution higher than 1024x768. 800x600x16 is the best compromise here.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
