Comment by saidinesh5
5 hours ago
> The more dynamic/animated an UI is, the less there's a difference between a retained- and immediate-mode API, since the UI needs to be redrawn each frame anyway. Immediate mode UIs might even be more efficient for highly dynamic UIs because they skip a lot of internal state update code - like creating/destroying/showing/hiding/moving widget objects).
That depends on the kind of animations - typically for user interfaces, it's just moving, scaling, playing with opacity etc.. that's just updating the matrices once.
So you describe the scene graph once (this rectangle here, upload that texture there, this border there) using DOM, QML etc..., and then just update the item properties on it.
As far as the end user/application developer is concerned , this is retained mode. As far as the GPU is considered it can be redrawing the whole UI every frame..
> it's just moving, scaling, playing with opacity etc.. that's just updating the matrices once.
...any tiny change like this will trigger a redraw (e.g. the GPU doing work) that's not much different from a redraw in an immediate mode system.
At most the redraw can be restricted to a part of the visible UI, but here the question is whether such a 'local' redraw is actually any cheaper than just redrawing everything (since figuring out what needs to be redrawn might be more expensive than just rendering everything from scratch - YMMV of course).
It's not about what gets redrawn but also how much of the UI state is still retained (by the GPU). Imagine having to reupload all the textures, meshes to the GPU every frame.
Something like a lot of text ? Probably easier to redraw everything in immediate mode.
Something like a lot of images just moving, scaling, around? Easier to retain that state in GPU and just update a few values here and there...
> Easier to retain that state in GPU and just update a few values here and there
It's really not that trivial to estimate, especially on high-dpi displays.
Rendering a texture with a 'baked UI' to the framebuffer might be "just about as expensive" as rendering the detailed UI elements directly to the framebuffer.
Processing a pixel isn't inherently cheaper than processing a vertex, but there are a lot more pixels than vertices in typical UIs (a baked texture might still win when there's a ton of alpha-blended layers though).
Also, of course you'd also need to aggressively batch draw calls (e.g. Dear ImGui only issues a new render command when the texture or clipping rectangle changes, e.g. a whole window will typically be rendered in one or two draw calls).