Page 1 of 1

Which texture size is better for performance?

PostPosted: Thu May 14, 2015 7:53 pm
by RyuMaster
Hi! Which texture size is better for performance?

One 4096 texture;

Or 4x1024x1024 textures?

Regards,
Konstantin.

Re: Which texture size is better for performance?

PostPosted: Thu May 14, 2015 8:03 pm
by fisherman
Hi Konstantin,

I assume you are asking about AT2 performance.
if I understood the basic principle of AT2 correctly, it should not make any difference, because AT2 generates its own texture file at build time and streams the texture as tiles from this file at runtime. So the generated texture file should look the same as long as the source resolution is the same.

In case I am wrong Ricardo will soon step in and let us know :)

Bernhard

Re: Which texture size is better for performance?

PostPosted: Thu May 14, 2015 8:08 pm
by Ricardo Teixeira
Hello Konstantin,

With Amplify Texture 2 individual texture size is not a factor in the final performance, be it 4k, 8k or 16k. Go as high as possible, you can even take it one step further by combining large amounts of 16k textures into Multi-Tile UV Collections. Regardless of the total amount of textures used in a Multi-Tile UV Collection it will be treated as a single texture by AT2, 1 drawcall.

When AT2 streams the data required it does so from a giant pre-processed virtual texture, the original texture files are not used.

Let us know if you have any additional questions, we would be happy to help.

All the best,
Ricardo

Re: Which texture size is better for performance?

PostPosted: Thu May 14, 2015 8:12 pm
by Ricardo Teixeira
fisherman wrote:Hi Konstantin,

I assume you are asking about AT2 performance.
if I understood the basic principle of AT2 correctly, it should not make any difference, because AT2 generates its own texture file at build time and streams the texture as tiles from this file at runtime. So the generated texture file should look the same as long as the source resolution is the same.

In case I am wrong Ricardo will soon step in and let us know :)

Bernhard


You beat me to it! ;)

That is correct, thanks Bernhard. A quick note, the 16k limit per-texture is only temporary, as soon as we introduce our proxy import system users will be able to import textures up to 32k.

Re: Which texture size is better for performance?

PostPosted: Thu May 14, 2015 9:04 pm
by RyuMaster
Ah, I see, thank you! That helps, rendering smaller textures are more workflow-efficient.

Re: Which texture size is better for performance?

PostPosted: Thu May 14, 2015 10:10 pm
by fisherman
Ricardo Teixeira wrote:A quick note, the 16k limit per-texture is only temporary, as soon as we introduce our proxy import system users will be able to import textures up to 32k.


Yeah, I saw a hint at the proxy system in the specs - this will be a great addition, making the texturing work quicker and easier as well, I guess!

Re: Which texture size is better for performance?

PostPosted: Fri May 15, 2015 9:31 am
by Ricardo Teixeira
Awesome, looking forward to your creations.