Rendering performance - one 8k material or two 4k?

Lemenus

Which will be faster to render - one big texture atlas for all objects in scene, or break it down on two-three-more smaller textures? 
And does it change in one renderer from another?

poopipe

An 8k map. Is equivalent to 4 4k maps

At runtime you're looking at 240mb+ compressed for a full texture set which is basically unacceptable for any realistic game situation. 

We are still in the era of 2k textures with 4k being a rare exception

Find another way to get the detail you need 

If this is for a demo or product shot then it makes no difference, if it fits in memory it will run fine

rollin

We're experimenting with virtual textures for this purpose. 
Though the majority of assets are still using one texture set of 2k or below so it's not really showing an impact in any way until you force it I assume.

poopipe

I'm not 100% on how unreal virtual textures work but for any dynamically loaded array of stuff you'll have less problems if you stuff it full of small chunks rather than large ones. 

marks

poopipe said:

I'm not 100% on how unreal virtual textures work but for any dynamically loaded array of stuff you'll have less problems if you stuff it full of small chunks rather than large ones. 

This.