I have uploaded the video on Youtube to give you deep insights about the lag while comparing Chrome with Microsoft Edge. The Edge browser seems to support GPU Boost and hence gives a flawless experience. However, the same is not with Chrome.
I tried to run this tour with another PC which has a lot more computing power. The CPU usage was 17-18% but still there was lag while the scene was running in Chrome.
So there is definitely something which isn’t compatible with Chrome browser
@nishantambekar Thank you for the video. Do I see correctly that the issue occurs outside in the full scren mode, but not inside?
GPU will be doing most work when the camera is outside and all the model is visible on the screen. The optimizations that prevent rendering of objects that are outside of the camera frustum, and rendering of triangles that are behind walls have small effect when the whole model is on the screen. The screen resolution also affects performance, the larger the window the more work needs to be done by the GPU.
For this particular model, perhaps optimizations of the most complex geometries could improve performance. To test this, could you hide trees, small rings from which the Club House facade is made and driveways to garages (they consist of many small triangles) and see if it helps? This can be done using Hide in views option in the Shapespark editor Objects tab.
Finally I was able to decode why such Lag happens. Here are my findings -
The number of polygons play a major role and Shapespark tries to render all the possible polygons visible in the camera frustum, even if they’re hidden behind the wall or not visible at all. When there are too many polygons squeezed in the camera frustum, then the lag kicks in and Shapespark tries to render everything. If the polygons are spread out evenly then even with high number of total polygons in the scene, it would work fine.
Chrome does not have any GPU acceleration and hence, the hardware of the device on which the tour is played is the determining factor of the user experience.
Hence, for the tour to be very smooth on Chrome and to avoid such a laggy experience, I urge shapespark to create a new thumb rule of the number of polygons to be below 500K.
When the 3D modelling artist would create the model using this thumb rule, it would be very user friendly with most of the devices worldwide.
Thanks for the analysis. Reducing the triangle count in always beneficial for a Shapespark scene, as it improves the frame rate and shortens the load time. However, the the 500K limit may require significant quality tradeoff for larger scenes, and may be too restrictive for a rule of thumb in my opinion. An average Shapespark scene visitor is not a gamer, so I think, has some level of tolerance for a lag. Also, based on what we hear from our users, feature/quality improvements seem to be currently more important than frame rate. That’s, why I think 3-4M triangles is reasonable as a general rule of thumb.
That said, I am aware each case is different. If you anticipate your audience is sensitive to low frame rate, you can adjust the general rule of thumb to your use case.
Yes, I agree with your views as you’re definitely more experienced as you’re the creator of this marvelous piece of software. With due respect to you, wanted to just share my opinion so that a person which considers “UX” to be at the top most priority would consider modelling withing 500K range.