Purely from a vram perspective. A triangle is just 3 vertices and some edges. A few bytes of data.
A similar 2d image of a triangle would likely be thousands of bits of data.
The 2d probably uses a little less per pixel. Whereas the triangle has slightly more expensive compute per pixel cost. But modern gpu have dedicated hardware for that.
3d is probably more expensive compute but cheaper vram usage. At least to a point and a certain set of conditions. Barring things like textures and others.
you do not need a different texel for every rendered pixel in every animation frame, which is what you need, and factorio has, with the sprite approach.
mitxela · · focus · HN ↗
tasuki · · focus · HN ↗
Surely from first principles one'd expect 3D models to be heavier than the 2D renders, due to the extra axis?
namrog84 · · focus · HN ↗
A similar 2d image of a triangle would likely be thousands of bits of data.
The 2d probably uses a little less per pixel. Whereas the triangle has slightly more expensive compute per pixel cost. But modern gpu have dedicated hardware for that.
3d is probably more expensive compute but cheaper vram usage. At least to a point and a certain set of conditions. Barring things like textures and others.
dymk · · focus · HN ↗
> Barring things like textures and others.
Other than some really expensive stuff, it's not expensive. Who could have guessed?
mitxela · · focus · HN ↗