I'm using bicubic filtering to smoothen my heightmap, I implemented it in GLSL:
Bicubic interpolation: (see interpolate() function bellow)
float interpolateBicubic(sampler2D tex, vec2 t)
{
vec2 offBot = vec2(0,-1);
vec2 offTop = vec2(0,1);
vec2 offRight = vec2(1,0);
vec2 offLeft = vec2(-1,0);
vec2 f = fract(t.xy * 1025);
vec2 bot0 = (floor(t.xy * 1025)+offBot+offLeft)/1025;
vec2 bot1 = (floor(t.xy * 1025)+offBot)/1025;
vec2 bot2 = (floor(t.xy * 1025)+offBot+offRight)/1025;
vec2 bot3 = (floor(t.xy * 1025)+offBot+2*offRight)/1025;
vec2 mbot0 = (floor(t.xy * 1025)+offLeft)/1025;
vec2 mbot1 = (floor(t.xy * 1025))/1025;
vec2 mbot2 = (floor(t.xy * 1025)+offRight)/1025;
vec2 mbot3 = (floor(t.xy * 1025)+2*offRight)/1025;
vec2 mtop0 = (floor(t.xy * 1025)+offTop+offLeft)/1025;
vec2 mtop1 = (floor(t.xy * 1025)+offTop)/1025;
vec2 mtop2 = (floor(t.xy * 1025)+offTop+offRight)/1025;
vec2 mtop3 = (floor(t.xy * 1025)+offTop+2*offRight)/1025;
vec2 top0 = (floor(t.xy * 1025)+2*offTop+offLeft)/1025;
vec2 top1 = (floor(t.xy * 1025)+2*offTop)/1025;
vec2 top2 = (floor(t.xy * 1025)+2*offTop+offRight)/1025;
vec2 top3 = (floor(t.xy * 1025)+2*offTop+2*offRight)/1025;
float h[16];
h[0] = texture(tex,bot0).r;
h[1] = texture(tex,bot1).r;
h[2] = texture(tex,bot2).r;
h[3] = texture(tex,bot3).r;
h[4] = texture(tex,mbot0).r;
h[5] = texture(tex,mbot1).r;
h[6] = texture(tex,mbot2).r;
h[7] = texture(tex,mbot3).r;
h[8] = texture(tex,mtop0).r;
h[9] = texture(tex,mtop1).r;
h[10] = texture(tex,mtop2).r;
h[11] = texture(tex,mtop3).r;
h[12] = texture(tex,top0).r;
h[13] = texture(tex,top1).r;
h[14] = texture(tex,top2).r;
h[15] = texture(tex,top3).r;
float H_ix[4];
H_ix[0] = interpolate(f.x,h[0],h[1],h[2],h[3]);
H_ix[1] = interpolate(f.x,h[4],h[5],h[6],h[7]);
H_ix[2] = interpolate(f.x,h[8],h[9],h[10],h[11]);
H_ix[3] = interpolate(f.x,h[12],h[13],h[14],h[15]);
float H_iy = interpolate(f.y,H_ix[0],H_ix[1],H_ix[2],H_ix[3]);
return H_iy;
}
This is my version of it, the texture size(1025) is still hardcoded. Using this in vertex shader and/or in tessellation evaluation shader, it affects performance very badly (20-30fps). But when I change the last line of this function to:
return 0;
the performance increases just like if I used bilinear or nearest/without filtering.
The same happens with: (I mean the performance remains good)
return h[...]; //...
return f.x; //...
return H_ix[...]; //...
The interpolation function:
float interpolate(float x, float v0, float v1, float v2,float v3)
{
double c1,c2,c3,c4; //changed to float, see EDITs
c1 = spline_matrix[0][1]*v1;
c2 = spline_matrix[1][0]*v0 + spline_matrix[1][2]*v2;
c3 = spline_matrix[2][0]*v0 + spline_matrix[2][1]*v1 + spline_matrix[2][2]*v2 + spline_matrix[2][3]*v3;
c4 = spline_matrix[3][0]*v0 + spline_matrix[3][1]*v1 + spline_matrix[3][2]*v2 + spline_matrix[3][3]*v3;
return(c4*x*x*x + c3*x*x +c2*x + c1);
};
The fps only decreases when I return the final, H_iy value.
How does the return value affects the performance?
EDIT I've just realized that I used double in the interpolate() function to declare c1, c2...ect.
I've changed it to float, and the performance now remains good with the proper return value.
So the question changes a bit:
How does a double precision variable affects the performance of the hardware, and why didn't the other interpolation function trigger this performance loss, only the last one, since the H_ix[] array was float too, just like the H_iy?
One thing you could do to speed this up is use texelFetch() instead of floor()/texture(), so the hardware doesn't waste time doing any filtering. Though hardware filtering is quite fast which is partly why I linked the gpu gems article. There's also now a textureSize() function which saves passing the values in yourself.
GLSL has a very aggressive optimizer, which throws away everything it possibly can. So lets say you spend ages computing a really expensive lighting value, but at the end just say colour = vec4(1), all your computation gets ignored and it runs really fast. This can take some getting used to when trying to benchmark things. I believe this is the issue you see when returning different values. Imagine every variable has a dependency tree and if any variable isn't used in an output, including uniforms and attributes and even across the shader stages, GLSL ignores it completely. One place I've seen GLSL compilers fall short here is in copying in/out function arguments when it doesn't have to.
As for the double precision, a similar question is here: https://superuser.com/questions/386456/why-does-a-geforce-card-perform-4x-slower-in-double-precision-than-a-tesla-card. In general, graphics needs to be fast and nearly always just uses single precision. For the more general purpose computing applications, eg scientific simulations, doubles of course give higher accuracy. You'll probably find a lot more about this in relation to CUDA.