University of Pennsylvania, CIS 565: GPU Programming and Architecture, Project 5
- Yuxin Hu
- Tested on: Windows 10, i7-6700HQ @ 2.60GHz 8GB, GTX 960M 4096MB (Personal Laptop)
Performance Comparason between Clustered Forward+ and Clustered Deferred shading
Performance Comparason between Clustered Forward+ and Clustered Deferred shading
Clustered Deferred shading is more than 2 times faster than Clustered Forward+ when the rendering is taken place inside castle. However, when the rendering is taken palce outside of the whole castle, the performance of Clustered Forward+ starts to get better than clustered deferred. Both shading methods use the same clustered lights calculations, so the performance difference arises from the calculation of which cluster does the fragment belong to. In clustered forward+, we loop over all vertex of geometries, calculate their clusteres, and find lights in those clusteres, no matter they will be rendered out in the final image or not. A lots of geometry vertice are out of screen space, or are being occluded, when the camera is inside the castle, which result in many calculations wasted. While clustered deferred shading has avoided this problem by filtering out the vertices that are occluded or out of screen in the first pass.
Performance Comparason between Clustered Forward+ and Clustered Deferred shading
As light number increases, the performance clustered deferred shading becomes much better than forward plus. While forward plus takes more time to do light calculation of geometry vertices that do not contribute to final rendering result, clustered deferred shading avoids the problem by first pass.
- Three.js by @mrdoob and contributors
- stats.js by @mrdoob and contributors
- webgl-debug by Khronos Group Inc.
- glMatrix by @toji and contributors
- minimal-gltf-loader by @shrekshao