-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 261
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
GPGPU particles example performance #205
Comments
hmmm... it's interesting - I've got an intuition (based on some previous experiences) that actually sometimes using webgl1 context instead of webgl2 surprisingly provides better performance, and indeed using dirty hack to trick twgl to use webgl1 - https://stackoverflow.com/a/42848865 (btw - no way to do this cleanly ?) I have now stable 60fps with 160 000 (or even 1 milion!) particles... Still, curious - why is this the case ? |
If you want webgl1 just get the context yourself.
to be honest I never use As for the speed issue that is suprising that the speed would change . As for lots of particles here's a million webgl2 https://jsgist.org/?src=94e9058c7ef1a4f124eccab4e7fdcd1d webgl1 |
thanks @greggman - figured out that I can use regarding the examples you have provided - it's the same story, webgl1 runs super smoothly, webgl2 barely edit - quickly checked in Firefox and Safari - seems that's some sort of Chrome-related bug (on Mac?), as in other browsers both webgl1 and webgl2 runs smoothly... |
I've been experiencing these types of performance issues with MacOS/Chrome and instanced rendering. The problem seems to be this Chrome bug: https://monorail-prod.appspot.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1245448. You may be having the same problem. Doesn't seem like there's a lot we can do about it at the moment, however. |
@JeffreyPalmer - thanks for the link, I've referred to this issue there, hope that would help the Chromium team to fix the problem, although the motivation for it might be rather low as Apple is moving to M1 hardware so AMD configuration is gonna get negligible in next few years.. anyway still it would be great if they fix this :) BTW - @greggman - have the examples you provided include any type of array instancing behind the scenes ? |
I've been playing with the code for GPGPU example (https://github.com/greggman/twgl.js/blob/master/examples/gpgpu-particles.html) and I'm surprised of how fast and dramatically the performance degrades wit the amount of the particles - with default 256x256 (about 65 000 particles) it runs smoothly - 60fps but with 400x400 (~160 000 particles) it's more like 30 fps. I'm kind of surprised since I've seen webgl based examples pulling like a milion of particles (so about 5x more) with no sweat...
Is there any caveat with this example that I'm missing that prevents better performance and/or there are any optimisations / different approaches to get ~ 200 000 particles with some rudimentary physics performing better ?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: