# OpenGL Loads of small objects

## Recommended Posts

Heya all! I'm currently creating a 2D engine in OpenGL, just as an experiment really. The way I learned OpenGL is with direct mode, using glBegin(GL_QUADS) calls to draw my sprites. I'm currently achieving something like 20FPS for 10.000 quads. I haven't kept up with recent developments, but it seems these days there are other ways with better performance, things like VBOs. So what is the best way to send loads and loads of small objects (basically 2 triangles per sprite) to the GPU? Keep in mind that these objects will change position (and scale and angle) every frame. My current idea is to create one big VBO, put all the coordinates in there (transformed on the CPU) and send it over to the GPU. Will that increase performance? Also, how do I combine that with texture mapping? Think animations: each sprite might have a different texture. Can I batch-upload a list of texture id's to be used together with the vertex data? Or perhaps I should use one big texture and create appropriate texture coordinates? Ah, so many questions. Anyone with some answers? Thanks!

##### Share on other sites
I have 1 big VBO (or Vertex Array fallback). The renderer just throws quads at it, batching for as long as it can, drawing whenever there's a state (eg texture) change.

It's simple to implement, so it's worth seeing if that will give you the performance you need. Combine your sprites to minimize state changes and loading.

If that doesn't get you there, I suspect you'll need to make the renderer sort your commands by state changes--which will make blending harder.

##### Share on other sites
for dynamic stuff you could get away with vertex arrays and for static stuff, put it into VBOs. you shall also draw rather triangles (not polygons) than quads, it's what hardware can draw and if u use quads, the driver has some more work.

20000 quads is not that much, if they're small, you might even draw sprites in software an being faster. if they're bigger, you might not be vertex limited, so vertex arrays might really be enough to get speed. your bottleneck is probably the API-calls to pass vertex by vertex.

like CadetUmfer said, try to combine as many triangles as possible into one drawcall. best would be to have just one big texture atlas with all those sprite textures you need and then to draw all triangles in one call.

##### Share on other sites
Okay, thanks, seems about what I thought then.

I've currently implemented it with one big texture and one VBO with interleaved position/texture data. Seems to work nice. I've seen a small performance increase, but when handling many objects I'm mostly CPU-bound in other code at the moment.

Oh well. I suppose that allows me to add stuff that puts some more load on the GPU then...

##### Share on other sites
>>for dynamic stuff you could get away with vertex arrays and for static stuff, put it into VBOs. you shall also draw rather triangles (not polygons) than quads, it's what hardware can draw and if u use quads, the driver has some more work.

the first part is correct but the 2nd perhaps not, a couple of weeks ago on of the lead guys at nvidia mentioned there hardware does quads i.e. it doesnt change them to 2 triangles.
Ild use quads regaurdless due to the shape fits most particles better (which are roundish or squarish) than a triangle, since fill is much more likely to cause a slowdown than the number of vertices

## Create an account

Register a new account

• ### Forum Statistics

• Total Topics
627765
• Total Posts
2978983
• ### Similar Content

• Hello! As an exercise for delving into modern OpenGL, I'm creating a simple .obj renderer. I want to support things like varying degrees of specularity, geometry opacity, things like that, on a per-material basis. Different materials can also have different textures. Basic .obj necessities. I've done this in old school OpenGL, but modern OpenGL has its own thing going on, and I'd like to conform as closely to the standards as possible so as to keep the program running correctly, and I'm hoping to avoid picking up bad habits this early on.
Reading around on the OpenGL Wiki, one tip in particular really stands out to me on this page:
For something like a renderer for .obj files, this sort of thing seems almost ideal, but according to the wiki, it's a bad idea. Interesting to note!
So, here's what the plan is so far as far as loading goes:
Set up a type for materials so that materials can be created and destroyed. They will contain things like diffuse color, diffuse texture, geometry opacity, and so on, for each material in the .mtl file. Since .obj files are conveniently split up by material, I can load different groups of vertices/normals/UVs and triangles into different blocks of data for different models. When it comes to the rendering, I get a bit lost. I can either:
Between drawing triangle groups, call glUseProgram to use a different shader for that particular geometry (so a unique shader just for the material that is shared by this triangle group). or
Between drawing triangle groups, call glUniform a few times to adjust different parameters within the "master shader", such as specularity, diffuse color, and geometry opacity. In both cases, I still have to call glBindTexture between drawing triangle groups in order to bind the diffuse texture used by the material, so there doesn't seem to be a way around having the CPU do *something* during the rendering process instead of letting the GPU do everything all at once.
The second option here seems less cluttered, however. There are less shaders to keep up with while one "master shader" handles it all. I don't have to duplicate any code or compile multiple shaders. Arguably, I could always have the shader program for each material be embedded in the material itself, and be auto-generated upon loading the material from the .mtl file. But this still leads to constantly calling glUseProgram, much more than is probably necessary in order to properly render the .obj. There seem to be a number of differing opinions on if it's okay to use hundreds of shaders or if it's best to just use tens of shaders.
So, ultimately, what is the "right" way to do this? Does using a "master shader" (or a few variants of one) bog down the system compared to using hundreds of shader programs each dedicated to their own corresponding materials? Keeping in mind that the "master shaders" would have to track these additional uniforms and potentially have numerous branches of ifs, it may be possible that the ifs will lead to additional and unnecessary processing. But would that more expensive than constantly calling glUseProgram to switch shaders, or storing the shaders to begin with?
With all these angles to consider, it's difficult to come to a conclusion. Both possible methods work, and both seem rather convenient for their own reasons, but which is the most performant? Please help this beginner/dummy understand. Thank you!

• I want to make professional java 3d game with server program and database,packet handling for multiplayer and client-server communicating,maps rendering,models,and stuffs Which aspect of java can I learn and where can I learn java Lwjgl OpenGL rendering Like minecraft and world of tanks

• A friend of mine and I are making a 2D game engine as a learning experience and to hopefully build upon the experience in the long run.

-What I'm using:
C++;. Since im learning this language while in college and its one of the popular language to make games with why not.     Visual Studios; Im using a windows so yea.     SDL or GLFW; was thinking about SDL since i do some research on it where it is catching my interest but i hear SDL is a huge package compared to GLFW, so i may do GLFW to start with as learning since i may get overwhelmed with SDL.
-Questions
Knowing what we want in the engine what should our main focus be in terms of learning. File managements, with headers, functions ect. How can i properly manage files with out confusing myself and my friend when sharing code. Alternative to Visual studios: My friend has a mac and cant properly use Vis studios, is there another alternative to it?

• Both functions are available since 3.0, and I'm currently using glMapBuffer(), which works fine.
But, I was wondering if anyone has experienced advantage in using glMapBufferRange(), which allows to specify the range of the mapped buffer. Could this be only a safety measure or does it improve performance?
Note: I'm not asking about glBufferSubData()/glBufferData. Those two are irrelevant in this case.
• By xhcao
Before using void glBindImageTexture(    GLuint unit, GLuint texture, GLint level, GLboolean layered, GLint layer, GLenum access, GLenum format), does need to make sure that texture is completeness.

• 11
• 10
• 10
• 23
• 14