(Charles - n) + (George + n) != Charles + George

re: (Charles - n) + (George + n) != Charles + George

Ultrahead — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 06:05:43 GMT

Hey! Why not rob Paul to pay Peter :)

re: (Charles - n) + (George + n) != Charles + George

AndrewVos — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 15:13:30 GMT

What game are you talking about, if you don't mind me asking?

I would like some idea of the size of the mesh you're talking about.

re: (Charles - n) + (George + n) != Charles + George

ShawnHargreaves — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 18:43:29 GMT

> Hey! Why not rob Paul to pay Peter :)

That would work too, as long as your game was Peter-bound :-)

For instance it is usually faster to do character skinning in the vertex shader, but if your game is GPU bound and bottlenecked by vertex processing, it might turn out faster to move that work back onto the CPU.

re: (Charles - n) + (George + n) != Charles + George

ShawnHargreaves — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 18:47:42 GMT

> What game are you talking about, if you don't mind me asking?

It was an internal thing, so I'm not sure how much I can talk about the details in public.

> I would like some idea of the size of the mesh you're talking about.

I had maybe 100,000 triangles in the environment.

Of course, I'm not saying you should never both with environment culling or visibility. My point is just that things can be pretty counterintuitive depending on the specifics of your app and hardware setup, and what seems like a surefire optimization might not always be depending on where your bottleneck turns out to be!

re: (Charles - n) + (George + n) != Charles + George

AndrewVos — Wed, 21 May 2008 19:37:55 GMT

Thanks for your response. By environment do you mean just terrain, or all "non-movable" objects?

P.S. Why doesn't msdn blogs notify me of the reply? It took me twenty minutes to find this post :(