• 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
AlexKappner

Memory footprint of compiled shader in graphics memory

4 posts in this topic

I am currently in the process of optimizing a DirectX 3d graphics engine that uses shaders that are compiled at run-time from .fx files. Currently, the engine creates a new DirectX Effect instance for every possible variation of shader parameters, even if they are based on the same .fx file. So, for example, if I have a water shader that comes in 2 variants, say "clear water" and "muddy water", both based on the same code, but with different index of refraction and reflectivities, the engine will compile the .fx twice. Would you consider that a significant waste of GPU memory, or is the compiled effect so small that rewriting the engine to re-use compiled Effects whereever possible would be a waste of developer time? Best regards & happy holidays Alexander
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In this kind of scenario the cost of switching shaders is likely to be significantly higher than the cost of having multiple shaders, so your focus should be on shader changes rather than on memory usage.  In the example you gave you could easily combine the two and have the variable factors as uniforms or even per-vertex attributes.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I did not consider that. Makes sense - even though the compiled shaders themselves are small, both the GPU and the host still waste cycles loading and unloading their code several times per frame. Thanks for your answer! Best regards Alexander
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GPU's do not "load and unload" shader code mid-frame, and won't waste cycles doing that. Any associated cost with switching shaders typically come from hidden state changes, flushes of the GPU pipeline, and/or extra work that needs to be done by the shader behind the scenes.

When it comes to compiling multiple versions of the same shader code, it depends on what the differences are. If the only difference is that one shader a parameter has a value of "4" and the other one has a value of "4.5", then it's probably not worth it. However in some cases a hard-coded parameter can allow the compiler to make significant optimizations. For instance imagine a simple pixel shader with lighting that has a albedo map and an albedo tint color, where the output is basically lighting * albedoMap * albedoTint. If you were set albedoTint to 0.0, then the compiler would optimize out the albedo map texture fetch as well as all of the lighting calculations since they would end up having no effect on the output. In that case it may be worth having multiple versions of the shader, rather than relying on passing the parameters as shader constants.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GPU's do not "load and unload" shader code mid-frame, and won't waste cycles doing that. Any associated cost with switching shaders typically come from hidden state changes, flushes of the GPU pipeline, and/or extra work that needs to be done by the shader behind the scenes.

 

Switching shaders also means having to break a draw call batch (same as any other state change) which - while not such a big deal on D3D11 as it was on 9 - is still not a free operation.

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