Java 3D does state sorting of this kind as well. And, either case below will work equally well. You will, however, get other performance benefits from using fewer Shape3D nodes. Doug Twilleager Java 3D Team Sun Microsystems >Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Subject: [JAVA3D] What's better? >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Ehlo > >I wonder what's better performance wise. Having many shapes with >the same material or having one shape with the same material but having >many geometry nodes? I know that Performer for example makes a material >sorting to cut down costs for OGL setMaterial calls. > >EOF, > J.D. > >-- >Realtime Raytracer in JAVA >(http://www.antiflash.net/raytrace) > >=========================================================================== >To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body >of the message "signoff JAVA3D-INTEREST". For general help, send email to >[EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help". =========================================================================== To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "signoff JAVA3D-INTEREST". For general help, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
