Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

3 Dimensional Chat / Polygons Question

Author
Message
Jna99
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Nov 2005
Location: Portugal
Posted: 19th Aug 2007 21:45
Hi I would like to know what is the best polygon number, to an object that is gonna be repeated around 50 times...e.g I'm doing an asteroid field problem is that each asteroid has 5118 polygons so around 50.. 229324 polygons! So I also would like to know if this poly count is normal for not necessary stuff in games. See the pic

Attachments

Login to view attachments
Blobby 101
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 17th Jun 2006
Location: England, UK
Posted: 19th Aug 2007 22:10
that polycount is waaay too high for any object in almost any game. if i were making an asteroid, it would have around 300-400 polys. 5118 polys to me is like, super high poly. this is mainly because i have a fairly low spec computer but even if your computer is realy good, think about the people who don't have the latest hardware and stuff. if your game has too many polys being rendered at once, some peoples computers will just give in.


thanks to deathead for the sig!
Projects: alien abductor-5%
Jna99
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Nov 2005
Location: Portugal
Posted: 19th Aug 2007 23:08
Hi again I believe what I'm getting is not the polygon count but the triangle count (don't know the difference) I'm getting this value through statistics command on GDK...About the asteroid I'm using the mesh in the dbp 3d examples (example 1)!

CattleRustler
Retired Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Aug 2003
Location: case modding at overclock.net
Posted: 20th Aug 2007 00:17
even if its triangles, its still kinda high.

My DBP plugins page is now hosted [href]here[/href]
JimB
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Sep 2002
Location: UK
Posted: 20th Aug 2007 14:25
If you use bump mapping you can bring that face count way down.
Just Googled this http://www.filterforge.com/filters/3215.html
Jna99
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Nov 2005
Location: Portugal
Posted: 20th Aug 2007 14:49
JimB I'm not using any shader, I've just loaded the asteroid from the 3d example 1 in the dbp help files, then make a mesh from it, and added that mesh 50x to a small cube, and scatter their positions..I believe I can drop my asteroid poly by using an action3d program like, does any one know a free poly reducer? Tonight I'll upload my exe so that you can tell me if the program is slow, cause I believe that this triangle count from statistics command is wrong.

Raven
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 20th Aug 2007 21:33
Polygon = Triangles in game development terms most of the time.
Often the words are interchanged by artists and programmers alike.

Quote: " would like to know what is the best polygon number, to an object that is gonna be repeated around 50 times...e.g I'm doing an asteroid field problem is that each asteroid has 5118 polygons so around 50.. 229324 polygons"


Well depending on the graphics card you're aiming the low-end to be will determin if the polycount is alright or not.
As far as current budget cards go (6200/7300/8400) you're really looking at 50 of those being quarter of your entire polygon budget. This said in space that isn't so bad really as they are the terrain really.

You optimise scenes based on what will be visible, and what else will be in it.

Quote: "that polycount is waaay too high for any object in almost any game. if i were making an asteroid, it would have around 300-400 polys. "


if you were still in the dark ages perhaps, the DBP engine itself isn't so bad with polycounts and can usually get close to what the card can push.. the performance really takes a nose dive when dealing with lots of alpha, effects and such. all those graphical lush you come to expect in modern games.

what i would say is that, it is probably a good idea having some nice LOD variations of a model that are swapped at reasonable distances. i'd also recommend planning out scenes before deciding on polycounts.

things with performance and polycounts get more tricky when dealing with shaders; as you have to figure out the performance difference between the complexity of a shader, plus between versions of shader models and how many vertices a model has plus the fillrate (polygons textured & mapped)

Quote: "If you use bump mapping you can bring that face count way down.
Just Googled this http://www.filterforge.com/filters/3215.html "


Sometimes a higher polygon count with a traditional T&L engine will run quicker than a low polygon model with a Shader engine. Depends on so many things really.

as i keep saying, so many aspect do depend entirely on what is in the scene itself. if it's just the asteroids themselves, then you can very easily have 200 at that polycount without any dip below 60fps.

CattleRustler
Retired Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Aug 2003
Location: case modding at overclock.net
Posted: 20th Aug 2007 23:00
concerning polys and triangles, its usually 2 triangles per poly (quads). So if you make a cube primitive you should have 6 polys, 8 verts, and 12 triangles.

even though people sometimes use the terms polys and triangles interchangeably, they really shouldnt.

My DBP plugins page is now hosted [href]here[/href]
Jna99
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Nov 2005
Location: Portugal
Posted: 20th Aug 2007 23:01
Can you point me to any free poly reducer...I can only find commercial!

JimB
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Sep 2002
Location: UK
Posted: 20th Aug 2007 23:55
Metasequoia3d and Milkshape3d both have poly reducers.

http://chumbalum.swissquake.ch/index.html

http://www.metaseq.net/english/index.html
Jna99
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Nov 2005
Location: Portugal
Posted: 21st Aug 2007 13:52
Thanks JimB I also found out that AC3D also had one!

JimB
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Sep 2002
Location: UK
Posted: 21st Aug 2007 14:16
Ah of course I should have known I have version 5.0 not that I use it anymore though.
The only free reducer I know of is VIZup I dont think its all that.
http://www.filetransit.com/view.php?id=16008
Raven
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 21st Aug 2007 15:14
Quote: "concerning polys and triangles, its usually 2 triangles per poly (quads). So if you make a cube primitive you should have 6 polys, 8 verts, and 12 triangles.

even though people sometimes use the terms polys and triangles interchangeably, they really shouldnt."


No, that is completely wrong.
In the true sense of the word a polygon simply means "multi-sided shape", as far as game development goes.. no one uses the term polygon anymore when talking about Quads, simply because engines are no longer designed Quad-based due to the simple fact that perspective correction on texels is lower than what it is for triangles; as well as all 3D cards accelerate triangles so even if you are using Quads (or N-Gon) rendering pipelines it will always be broken up into triangles for rendering purposes anyway.

So as I said above the term polygon and triangle are interchangeable. DBP for example is a Triangle Strip engine, so that is what it classes as a Polygon. This is true for every current engine I know of nowadays.

If you're going to correct me, don't do so with incorrect information.

CattleRustler
Retired Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Aug 2003
Location: case modding at overclock.net
Posted: 21st Aug 2007 16:45
I wasnt trying to correct you - in fact I wasnt speaking to or about you. Ask me how I knew you would think so, and how I knew youd post along the lines that you did? Years of experience. I was commenting on the fact that what you said was true about people mixing terms and that they shouldnt.

open a modelling program, make a polygon mesh cube primitive:
8 verts
6 poly
12 triangles

correct or incorrect?

My DBP plugins page is now hosted [href]here[/href]
Raven
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 21st Aug 2007 16:59 Edited at: 21st Aug 2007 17:00
Quote: "open a modelling program, make a polygon mesh cube primitive:
8 verts
6 poly
12 triangles

correct or incorrect?"


incorrect



legend for the screenshot:
Verts = Vertices
Edges = Edges
Faces = Polygons (faces broken up by edges, this can be triangles, quads, or n-gons)
Tris = Triangles (game polygons)
UVs = Texture Vertices

Attachments

Login to view attachments
Raven
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 21st Aug 2007 17:09 Edited at: 21st Aug 2007 17:10
second shot, just to make the point clearer



Attachments

Login to view attachments
CattleRustler
Retired Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Aug 2003
Location: case modding at overclock.net
Posted: 21st Aug 2007 17:19
look at your unmodified first image, you say I am incorrect but the numbers there say exactly what I said, although it says Faces instead of Poly those are interchangeable terms, triangles is not. Notice it says 12 Triangles?

so I said:
Quote: "
8 verts
6 poly
12 triangles
"


and your app said:
Quote: "
8 verts
6 Faces
12 tris
"


yet I am wrong?

My DBP plugins page is now hosted [href]here[/href]
Xenocythe
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th May 2005
Location: You Essay.
Posted: 21st Aug 2007 17:35
Raven
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 21st Aug 2007 18:47
Quote: "look at your unmodified first image, you say I am incorrect but the numbers there say exactly what I said, although it says Faces instead of Poly those are interchangeable terms, triangles is not. Notice it says 12 Triangles?"


Yes, but take a look at the second one.. then YOUR definition of a polygon. Also, I'd suggest you take a look at Milkshape3D for it's statistics for the same cube; you'll see a very definite difference.

my point is that a Polygon is not a Triangle or Quad, but when dealing with games the standard is Triangle.

CattleRustler
Retired Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Aug 2003
Location: case modding at overclock.net
Posted: 21st Aug 2007 19:46 Edited at: 21st Aug 2007 19:52
From the direct x sdk:
Quote: "
A 3-D primitive is a collection of vertices that form a single 3-D entity. The simplest primitive is a collection of points in a 3-D coordinate system, which is called a point list.

Often, 3-D primitives are polygons. A polygon is a closed 3-D figure delineated by at least three vertices. The simplest polygon is a triangle. Microsoft Direct3D uses triangles to compose most of its polygons because all three vertices in a triangle are guaranteed to be coplanar. Rendering nonplanar vertices is inefficient. You can combine triangles to form large, complex polygons and meshes.

The following illustration shows a cube. Two triangles form each face of the cube. The entire set of triangles forms one cubic primitive.
(pic of a wireframe cube 6 faces/polys, 12 triangles)
"


if you draw 3 verts and 3 edges, you have 1 triangle / 1 poly/face
if you draw 4 verts and 4 edges, you have 2 triangles / 1 poly/face

edit: I think we are running into symantics problems between the general terms of "polygon" (many sides) and "triangle", vs. the term Triangles which from the rendering standpoint can be drawn specifically as triangles, or applied at render-time by the renderer to make polygons (quads and n-gons) into implied triangles for quicker rendering.

My DBP plugins page is now hosted [href]here[/href]
RichMan
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Jun 2006
Location: West midlands UK
Posted: 21st Aug 2007 23:41
@Jna99 lmao! nice thread! I might start taking bets now. this has to be one of the best forum wars here so far. Lets throw mud on them!
and btw Raven is totally right....
regards

richman


'Making safer worlds through superior firepower' - UAC
CattleRustler
Retired Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Aug 2003
Location: case modding at overclock.net
Posted: 22nd Aug 2007 00:39
Quote: " this has to be one of the best forum wars here so far."

this is a war? hardly. there have been some real doozies over the years, this is nothing. fanning flames is never advisable btw, you might get burned.

My DBP plugins page is now hosted [href]here[/href]
Raven
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 22nd Aug 2007 01:01
Quote: "edit: I think we are running into symantics problems between the general terms of "polygon""


true, i just want to get everyone on to a more standardised way of talking about things. one of the biggest issues with talking about 3d is everyone has their own semantics.

if we can get most talking about things the same way it'll help them to be more clear when they're asking for help or such.

also on the original point, people will find the polygon count is fairly moot compared to the issue of dbpros poor object handling. lots of objects no matter the count will cause performance issues.

for example I can have on my FX5200 a single object with 250,000 polygons and my ocean shader (that someone seems to be currently claiming as their own in that ultimate shader pack) at 72fps... however if I have 50x 1,000 polygon objects just textured then I'll barely hit 60fps.

So that's something you have to look out for. Instancing helps, especially on shader cards but in all isn't a perfect solution for the underlying problem.

Quote: "this has to be one of the best forum wars here so far."


do a search in this forum area for "Simple + Leyvin" with the google search... then you'll see some true forum wars.

hessiess
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Mar 2007
Location: pc!
Posted: 22nd Aug 2007 02:11
don't use poly reducers, thay make messy meshes and do not give much control. do it manually, so you can leev extra detail were you need it

learn blender, you will never regret it.

Brain111
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Feb 2007
Location: In my own little world.
Posted: 22nd Aug 2007 02:30
I'm gonna have to agree with hessiess. Blender has a nice looking polygon reducer called Decimate. But, as the name suggests, it totally destroys your mesh. I would only use this if you i didn't plan on UV mapping my model later (and I almost always do uv map them) and I needed to get it done really fast.

Anarchy Burger - hold the Government!
GatorHex
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Apr 2005
Location: Gunchester, UK
Posted: 22nd Aug 2007 07:26 Edited at: 22nd Aug 2007 07:30
Raven, your results vary, "250,000 poly single object v's 50 x 1000 poly objects", because the first makes one draw call per frame where the other makes 50 draw calls per frame

If you limbed your 50 x 1000 poly objects together into a single object it should improve speed. Well that's the theory anyway
You might have to handle off camera culling with hide limb though, I'm not sure if Lee ever implimented limb culling.

DinoHunter (still no nVidia compo voucher!), CPU/GPU Benchmark, DarkFish Encryption DLL, War MMOG (WIP), 3D Model Viewer
Raven
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 22nd Aug 2007 14:44
Quote: "Raven, your results vary, "250,000 poly single object v's 50 x 1000 poly objects", because the first makes one draw call per frame where the other makes 50 draw calls per frame

If you limbed your 50 x 1000 poly objects together into a single object it should improve speed. Well that's the theory anyway
You might have to handle off camera culling with hide limb though, I'm not sure if Lee ever implimented limb culling."


Actually, no. The reason for this performance dip has very little to do with consecutive draw calls. Apart from anything else most cards can happily handle upto 350 draw calls per frame. The reason for the performance drop is more down to the piss poor object handling routines TGC use.

So while yes you will see a bit of an improvement if you limb all of the object; it ends up being only a minor one.
With lots of object in-scene you end up with a huge performance drop, this is actually even more obvious when you cut objects out of the draw call routine.

They might sort this out one day, but honestly I wouldn't hold your breath. I've been waiting for them to sort out the ability to callback UDTs from functions for going on 5years now.

Jna99
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Nov 2005
Location: Portugal
Posted: 22nd Aug 2007 16:31
Guys actually I've been testing with 200 limbs I get constant 60pfs and since I reduced the asteroids to 1800 polys I'm getting arround 290 000 polys, so I'm gonna post my executable that will test your machine with 30 50 100 150 limbs, I would like you all could post your results!

Not_Maindric
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Jul 2007
Location: Omaha, NE
Posted: 22nd Aug 2007 16:34
I will probably fail on the second... I personally think 1800 Polly's is still high for an astroid, but I am willing to try once you get it up.

Jna99
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Nov 2005
Location: Portugal
Posted: 22nd Aug 2007 17:07
Well maybe I'll start with lower numbers!

dark coder
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Oct 2002
Location: Japan
Posted: 22nd Aug 2007 17:34
I agree with raven, object counts are a huge bottleneck in DBP. If the handling routines were better then making huge forests(where each tree is a separate object) would be much easier. Currently having 1000 or so objects makes the FPS dive especially when objects are cloned, however if you merge these objects into one you get a staggering increase in FPS, even when they don't move / change in any way. Obviously I don't expect them to run at the same speed but it should be much faster than it currently is.

Raven
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 22nd Aug 2007 17:42
You can seriously increase fps with the instance object function (or even better instancing via shaders), but not sure if they've fixed the memory leak, delete object and excude from render pipeline bugs with the clone and instance systems yet.

i know they've added a sort feature though, so objects that are the same will not only render in the same draw call but also put them in the same routine so you don't get the lag from their vector list.

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2024-11-26 04:53:09
Your offset time is: 2024-11-26 04:53:09