Great information, as always! I've noticed that shadows from nanite meshes remain visible at much larger distances than shadows from regular meshes. For this reason I usually choose to enable nanite even on low-poly meshes... According to Epic, nanite interacts better with their new shadow system for UE5
Good point. Even if your levels have 10 thousand plus low poly meshes, you will see a net benefit to using Nanite. Depending on the mesh design I found the crossover point to be around 5000 to 10,000 meshes in the frustum.
I am planning on performing more Nanite Landscape tests soon, to see where it can have an advantage. Terrain as a mesh should most always benefit from Nanite, especially if the entire terrain is LOD0. I should do some tests of Nanite Mesh Terrain as well, just to round out the test information.
Great information, as always! I've noticed that shadows from nanite meshes remain visible at much larger distances than shadows from regular meshes. For this reason I usually choose to enable nanite even on low-poly meshes... According to Epic, nanite interacts better with their new shadow system for UE5
Good point. Even if your levels have 10 thousand plus low poly meshes, you will see a net benefit to using Nanite. Depending on the mesh design I found the crossover point to be around 5000 to 10,000 meshes in the frustum.
In my project I have terrain as fbx and converting to nanite improved the performance. I can share the project with you to test.
I am planning on performing more Nanite Landscape tests soon, to see where it can have an advantage. Terrain as a mesh should most always benefit from Nanite, especially if the entire terrain is LOD0. I should do some tests of Nanite Mesh Terrain as well, just to round out the test information.