• Announcements

    • khawk

      Download the Game Design and Indie Game Marketing Freebook   07/19/17

      GameDev.net and CRC Press have teamed up to bring a free ebook of content curated from top titles published by CRC Press. The freebook, Practices of Game Design & Indie Game Marketing, includes chapters from The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, and An Architectural Approach to Level Design. The GameDev.net FreeBook is relevant to game designers, developers, and those interested in learning more about the challenges in game development. We know game development can be a tough discipline and business, so we picked several chapters from CRC Press titles that we thought would be of interest to you, the GameDev.net audience, in your journey to design, develop, and market your next game. The free ebook is available through CRC Press by clicking here. The Curated Books The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, Second Edition, by Jesse Schell Presents 100+ sets of questions, or different lenses, for viewing a game’s design, encompassing diverse fields such as psychology, architecture, music, film, software engineering, theme park design, mathematics, anthropology, and more. Written by one of the world's top game designers, this book describes the deepest and most fundamental principles of game design, demonstrating how tactics used in board, card, and athletic games also work in video games. It provides practical instruction on creating world-class games that will be played again and again. View it here. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, by Joel Dreskin Marketing is an essential but too frequently overlooked or minimized component of the release plan for indie games. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing provides you with the tools needed to build visibility and sell your indie games. With special focus on those developers with small budgets and limited staff and resources, this book is packed with tangible recommendations and techniques that you can put to use immediately. As a seasoned professional of the indie game arena, author Joel Dreskin gives you insight into practical, real-world experiences of marketing numerous successful games and also provides stories of the failures. View it here. An Architectural Approach to Level Design This is one of the first books to integrate architectural and spatial design theory with the field of level design. The book presents architectural techniques and theories for level designers to use in their own work. It connects architecture and level design in different ways that address the practical elements of how designers construct space and the experiential elements of how and why humans interact with this space. Throughout the text, readers learn skills for spatial layout, evoking emotion through gamespaces, and creating better levels through architectural theory. View it here. Learn more and download the ebook by clicking here. Did you know? GameDev.net and CRC Press also recently teamed up to bring GDNet+ Members up to a 20% discount on all CRC Press books. Learn more about this and other benefits here.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
TeamPerformance

OpenGL
Improve performance: Render 100000+ objects

4 posts in this topic

Hello,

We prepared a little test project (VS 2010, C++, OpenGl, Freeglut, Glew) to publish our solution to the following main requirements:


- Rendering 100000+ objects at the same time, each one of those independently accessible/seleccionable to be able to change their properties.

- The objects are of a certain type that defines their general shape and properties, which is also changeable during execution.

- Use OF VBOs, Shaders, OpenGl 3.3

- Should work on low-level graphic cards.



This is a very simplified version of our actual project, we are aware of some general methods to improve overall performance such as rendering only the visible objects and not those which are temporarily outside of your frustum.

For this example we took those techniques and other features out to make it smaller and easier to understand.

But please don't hold back with anything that comes to your mind and works for you, we might as well have missed something obvious.

Any constructive criticism, feedback and/or information, tips to improve the performance are welcome.

On our computers (Intel i7-2600, CPU @ 3.40, Ge Force GT 220) we render 100000 objects at about 6-8 frames/sec.
1000000 objects at 3 frames/sec.

It would be nice to improve the performance to get close to 20-25 frames/sec, although it might simply not be possible.


General Info:

Use your left mouse button to rotate the camera and A, D, W, S to move it to the left, right, up or down.

[color=#0000ff]EDIT: What we are looking is a way to improve the performance. Is our approach a proper way to render 100000 objects? We tested a lot of different ways and the reason why we chose this solution is because it gave us the best overall performance, but as I said, maybe we missed the obvious and did not use the "standard" OpenGL way of solving this problem. We couldnt really find a lot information about a project where the requirements were to render this amount of objects.[/color]
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
* The [font=courier new,courier,monospace]Cube[/font] and [font=courier new,courier,monospace]Pyramid[/font] classes seem to be exact duplicates of each other? These classes seem like they shouldn't exist, and you should just use [font=courier new,courier,monospace]Shape[/font] instead for both? I mean, if you've got artists making all sorts of shapes for your game, you don't want a programmer to have to make classes for [font=courier new,courier,monospace]Fish[/font], [font=courier new,courier,monospace]Rock[/font], [font=courier new,courier,monospace]BiggerRock[/font], [font=courier new,courier,monospace]FencePost[/font], [font=courier new,courier,monospace]GreenFencePost[/font], [font=courier new,courier,monospace]Tree01[/font], [font=courier new,courier,monospace]Tree02[/font], etc... You should be able to add new "shapes" to a game without writing new code.

* The use of [font=courier new,courier,monospace]virtual[/font] for drawing pyramids/cubes is an unnecessary idea - especially when every odd/even shape alternates between a pyramid and a cube, as this causes your render loop to alternate between calling two different rendering functions ([i]doubling your icache requirements[/i]).

* There's a lot of room to reduce the number of [font=courier new,courier,monospace]gl[/font] calls during rendering -- e.g. if several cubes were rendered after one another, then only the first would have to call [font=courier new,courier,monospace]glBindVertexArray[/font], every following cube could skip that call.

* There's no sorting of the data going on. By sorting your ([i]visible[/i]) objects each frame before submitting their [font=courier new,courier,monospace]gl[/font] calls, you can greatly reduce the number of [font=courier new,courier,monospace]gl[/font] calls that need to be made (as above).

Regarding C++ style - your classes don't follow the [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_three_(C%2B%2B_programming)"]rule of three[/url] nor implement the [url="http://dev-faqs.blogspot.com.au/2010/07/c-idioms-non-copyable.html"]non-copyable idiom[/url], which makes them dangerous:[code]{
ShapeType x(1), y(2);
y = x;
}//Heap corruption: both x and y delete x's resources in their destructor. Also: y's resources are leaked.[/code]
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
* The [font=courier new,courier,monospace]Cube[/font] and [font=courier new,courier,monospace]Pyramid[/font] classes seem to be exact duplicates of each other? These classes seem like they shouldn't exist, and you should just use [font=courier new,courier,monospace]Shape[/font] instead for both? I mean, if you've got artists making all sorts of shapes for your game, you don't want a programmer to have to make classes for [font=courier new,courier,monospace]Fish[/font], [font=courier new,courier,monospace]Rock[/font], [font=courier new,courier,monospace]BiggerRock[/font], [font=courier new,courier,monospace]FencePost[/font], [font=courier new,courier,monospace]GreenFencePost[/font], [font=courier new,courier,monospace]Tree01[/font], [font=courier new,courier,monospace]Tree02[/font], etc... You should be able to add new "shapes" to a game without writing new code.

[color=#0000ff]In this example you are right, but for us it is essential that different objects have different render methods. [/color]
[color=#0000ff]Maybe we should have explained it better in the post description.[/color]

* The use of [font=courier new,courier,monospace]virtual[/font] for drawing pyramids/cubes is an unnecessary idea - especially when every odd/even shape alternates between a pyramid and a cube, as this causes your render loop to alternate between calling two different rendering functions ([i]doubling your icache requirements[/i]).

[color=#0000ff]The use of virtual is also necessary to be able to have 1 list of shapes and we need polymorphism for more complex object structures.[/color]
[color=#0000ff]The instantiation of shapes in the odd/even way was only done for the purpose of this test project. We will have a list of unsorted objects.[/color]

* There's a lot of room to reduce the number of [font=courier new,courier,monospace]gl[/font] calls during rendering -- e.g. if several cubes were rendered after one another, then only the first would have to call [font=courier new,courier,monospace]glBindVertexArray[/font], every following cube could skip that call.

[color=#0000ff]This is a good idea, but in the tests we have made we didnt see any relevant improvements. For instance if create only Cube objects, delete the glBindVertexArray calls in the render method of the cube and put the glBindVertexArray call in the DrawScene method, like this:[/color]

[color=#a52a2a][size=2]void DrawScene(void)
{
glUseProgram(ShaderIds[0]);
glBindVertexArray(CubeShapeType->stBufferIds[0]);

for(int id = 0; id < arrShapesSize; id++)
{
arrShapes[id]->Render(globalShapeRenderingCounter, ModelMatrixUniformLocation, ColorUniformLocation, ChangeColorUniformLocation);
}

glUseProgram(0);

globalShapeRenderingCounter++;
if (globalShapeRenderingCounter > arrShapesSize) { globalShapeRenderingCounter = 0; }

glBindVertexArray(0);
}[/size][/color]

[color=#0000ff]we couldnt see any essential improvements.[/color]

* There's no sorting of the data going on. By sorting your ([i]visible[/i]) objects each frame before submitting their [font=courier new,courier,monospace]gl[/font] calls, you can greatly reduce the number of [font=courier new,courier,monospace]gl[/font] calls that need to be made (as above).

[color=#0000ff]we do check if objects are visible or not (Frustum method). [/color]

Regarding C++ style - your classes don't follow the [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_three_%28C%2B%2B_programming%29"]rule of three[/url] nor implement the [url="http://dev-faqs.blogspot.com.au/2010/07/c-idioms-non-copyable.html"]non-copyable idiom[/url], which makes them dangerous:
{
ShapeType x(1), y(2);
y = x;
}//Heap corruption: both x and y delete x's resources in their destructor. Also: y's resources are leaked.

[color=#0000ff]Thanks for this, we will implement it.[/color]
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree with Hogman about your class structure, but for slightly different reasons.

I've changed my thinking on class structures over the years and on a relatively large project I now find the base class/derived-class with render method to be unwieldy. It doesn't scale well. The best method is to define a class called shape, and for that class to encapsulate the data needed to draw any shape, i.e. a set of vertices and so on. Then you can separate your data from the rendering of that data, perhaps using a visitor pattern to fetch and render all shapes from a collection of shapes. No virtual functions required and more flexibility in the design. You tend to find with base class/derived class that there are often things that two derived classes need that a third doesn't, that get stuffed into the base class in any case. It just grows into a bit of a mess with the lines of responsibility unclear once you start adding lots of derived classes.

With respect to drawing 100,000 objects, you really need to be [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geometry_instancing"]instancing[/url].
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This might provide some insight: [url="http://origin-developer.nvidia.com/docs/IO/8230/BatchBatchBatch.pdf?q=docs/IO/8230/BatchBatchBatch.pdf"]http://origin-developer.nvidia.com/docs/IO/8230/BatchBatchBatch.pdf?q=docs/IO/8230/BatchBatchBatch.pdf[/url]

As mentioned above, it's not feasible to be submitting 100,000 different draw-calls per frame. You need to merge draw-calls together in order to reduce the CPU load.
If instancing is not an option, there's many "pseudo instancing" techniques - such as storing the same vertex data several times back-to-back in the same VBO, which lets you draw the same object multiple times with one draw-call.

[quote name='TeamPerformance' timestamp='1331565840' post='4921361']In this example you are right, but for us it is essential that different objects have different render methods.
The use of virtual is also necessary to be able to have 1 list of shapes and we need polymorphism for more complex object structures.[/quote]Your low-level rendering classes, which make [font=courier new,courier,monospace]gl[/font] calls, do not need to have polymorphic render functions. At this level, you should be working with simple objects which can be composed into complex objects.
At a higher level, you can have polymorphic classes which submit different combinations of these simple compositions.
[quote name='TeamPerformance' timestamp='1331565840' post='4921361']This is a good idea, but in the tests we have made we didnt see any relevant improvements.[/quote]Have you confirmed weather you are GPU-bound or CPU-bound? e.g. if your CPU loop takes 30ms, but is submitting 60ms worth of work to the GPU, then no amount of CPU-side optimisation is going to improve performance.
[quote name='TeamPerformance' timestamp='1331565840' post='4921361']
[i]* There's no sorting of the data going on. By sorting your (visible) objects each frame before submitting their [font=courier new,courier,monospace]gl[/font] calls, you can greatly reduce the number of [font=courier new,courier,monospace]gl[/font] calls that need to be made (as above).[/i]
we do check if objects are visible or not (Frustum method).[/quote]Visibility testing is not sorting. After you've culled your scene and determined the visible list of objects, you can re-order the list of objects to be drawn to achieve the most optimal rendering order.
e.g. if you've got expensive pixel shaders, then drawing objects from the closest the the furthest will improve your GPU performance (due to hi-z / early-z pixel rejection).
Or, if you've got many objects that share the same state (e.g. same textures, same shaders, etc) then drawing them at the same time will reduce the number of [font=courier new,courier,monospace]gl[/font] calls, which will improve CPU performance.

Also, have you run your program through any kind of profiler to see where the hot spots are?
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Similar Content

    • By mapra99
      Hello

      I am working on a recent project and I have been learning how to code in C# using OpenGL libraries for some graphics. I have achieved some quite interesting things using TAO Framework writing in Console Applications, creating a GLUT Window. But my problem now is that I need to incorporate the Graphics in a Windows Form so I can relate the objects that I render with some .NET Controls.

      To deal with this problem, I have seen in some forums that it's better to use OpenTK instead of TAO Framework, so I can use the glControl that OpenTK libraries offer. However, I haven't found complete articles, tutorials or source codes that help using the glControl or that may insert me into de OpenTK functions. Would somebody please share in this forum some links or files where I can find good documentation about this topic? Or may I use another library different of OpenTK?

      Thanks!
    • By Solid_Spy
      Hello, I have been working on SH Irradiance map rendering, and I have been using a GLSL pixel shader to render SH irradiance to 2D irradiance maps for my static objects. I already have it working with 9 3D textures so far for the first 9 SH functions.
      In my GLSL shader, I have to send in 9 SH Coefficient 3D Texures that use RGBA8 as a pixel format. RGB being used for the coefficients for red, green, and blue, and the A for checking if the voxel is in use (for the 3D texture solidification shader to prevent bleeding).
      My problem is, I want to knock this number of textures down to something like 4 or 5. Getting even lower would be a godsend. This is because I eventually plan on adding more SH Coefficient 3D Textures for other parts of the game map (such as inside rooms, as opposed to the outside), to circumvent irradiance probe bleeding between rooms separated by walls. I don't want to reach the 32 texture limit too soon. Also, I figure that it would be a LOT faster.
      Is there a way I could, say, store 2 sets of SH Coefficients for 2 SH functions inside a texture with RGBA16 pixels? If so, how would I extract them from inside GLSL? Let me know if you have any suggestions ^^.
    • By KarimIO
      EDIT: I thought this was restricted to Attribute-Created GL contexts, but it isn't, so I rewrote the post.
      Hey guys, whenever I call SwapBuffers(hDC), I get a crash, and I get a "Too many posts were made to a semaphore." from Windows as I call SwapBuffers. What could be the cause of this?
      Update: No crash occurs if I don't draw, just clear and swap.
      static PIXELFORMATDESCRIPTOR pfd = // pfd Tells Windows How We Want Things To Be { sizeof(PIXELFORMATDESCRIPTOR), // Size Of This Pixel Format Descriptor 1, // Version Number PFD_DRAW_TO_WINDOW | // Format Must Support Window PFD_SUPPORT_OPENGL | // Format Must Support OpenGL PFD_DOUBLEBUFFER, // Must Support Double Buffering PFD_TYPE_RGBA, // Request An RGBA Format 32, // Select Our Color Depth 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, // Color Bits Ignored 0, // No Alpha Buffer 0, // Shift Bit Ignored 0, // No Accumulation Buffer 0, 0, 0, 0, // Accumulation Bits Ignored 24, // 24Bit Z-Buffer (Depth Buffer) 0, // No Stencil Buffer 0, // No Auxiliary Buffer PFD_MAIN_PLANE, // Main Drawing Layer 0, // Reserved 0, 0, 0 // Layer Masks Ignored }; if (!(hDC = GetDC(windowHandle))) return false; unsigned int PixelFormat; if (!(PixelFormat = ChoosePixelFormat(hDC, &pfd))) return false; if (!SetPixelFormat(hDC, PixelFormat, &pfd)) return false; hRC = wglCreateContext(hDC); if (!hRC) { std::cout << "wglCreateContext Failed!\n"; return false; } if (wglMakeCurrent(hDC, hRC) == NULL) { std::cout << "Make Context Current Second Failed!\n"; return false; } ... // OGL Buffer Initialization glClear(GL_DEPTH_BUFFER_BIT | GL_COLOR_BUFFER_BIT); glBindVertexArray(vao); glUseProgram(myprogram); glDrawElements(GL_TRIANGLES, indexCount, GL_UNSIGNED_SHORT, (void *)indexStart); SwapBuffers(GetDC(window_handle));  
    • By Tchom
      Hey devs!
       
      I've been working on a OpenGL ES 2.0 android engine and I have begun implementing some simple (point) lighting. I had something fairly simple working, so I tried to get fancy and added color-tinting light. And it works great... with only one or two lights. Any more than that, the application drops about 15 frames per light added (my ideal is at least 4 or 5). I know implementing lighting is expensive, I just didn't think it was that expensive. I'm fairly new to the world of OpenGL and GLSL, so there is a good chance I've written some crappy shader code. If anyone had any feedback or tips on how I can optimize this code, please let me know.
       
      Vertex Shader
      uniform mat4 u_MVPMatrix; uniform mat4 u_MVMatrix; attribute vec4 a_Position; attribute vec3 a_Normal; attribute vec2 a_TexCoordinate; varying vec3 v_Position; varying vec3 v_Normal; varying vec2 v_TexCoordinate; void main() { v_Position = vec3(u_MVMatrix * a_Position); v_TexCoordinate = a_TexCoordinate; v_Normal = vec3(u_MVMatrix * vec4(a_Normal, 0.0)); gl_Position = u_MVPMatrix * a_Position; } Fragment Shader
      precision mediump float; uniform vec4 u_LightPos["+numLights+"]; uniform vec4 u_LightColours["+numLights+"]; uniform float u_LightPower["+numLights+"]; uniform sampler2D u_Texture; varying vec3 v_Position; varying vec3 v_Normal; varying vec2 v_TexCoordinate; void main() { gl_FragColor = (texture2D(u_Texture, v_TexCoordinate)); float diffuse = 0.0; vec4 colourSum = vec4(1.0); for (int i = 0; i < "+numLights+"; i++) { vec3 toPointLight = vec3(u_LightPos[i]); float distance = length(toPointLight - v_Position); vec3 lightVector = normalize(toPointLight - v_Position); float diffuseDiff = 0.0; // The diffuse difference contributed from current light diffuseDiff = max(dot(v_Normal, lightVector), 0.0); diffuseDiff = diffuseDiff * (1.0 / (1.0 + ((1.0-u_LightPower[i])* distance * distance))); //Determine attenuatio diffuse += diffuseDiff; gl_FragColor.rgb *= vec3(1.0) / ((vec3(1.0) + ((vec3(1.0) - vec3(u_LightColours[i]))*diffuseDiff))); //The expensive part } diffuse += 0.1; //Add ambient light gl_FragColor.rgb *= diffuse; } Am I making any rookie mistakes? Or am I just being unrealistic about what I can do? Thanks in advance
    • By yahiko00
      Hi,
      Not sure to post at the right place, if not, please forgive me...
      For a game project I am working on, I would like to implement a 2D starfield as a background.
      I do not want to deal with static tiles, since I plan to slowly animate the starfield. So, I am trying to figure out how to generate a random starfield for the entire map.
      I feel that using a uniform distribution for the stars will not do the trick. Instead I would like something similar to the screenshot below, taken from the game Star Wars: Empire At War (all credits to Lucasfilm, Disney, and so on...).

      Is there someone who could have an idea of a distribution which could result in such a starfield?
      Any insight would be appreciated
  • Popular Now