Three.js BufferGeometry vs Geometry for particles

Question

Some particle examples use THREE.BufferGeometry and others use a simply THREE.Geometry. Some lines about pros and cons of every method?

score 3 · Accepted Answer · answered May 12 '14 at 14:01

3

THREE.BufferGeometry is slowly replacing THREE.Geometry as it is computationally more efficient.

The THREE.BufferGeometry API may still be undergoing changes, so you have to be prepared for that.

The THREE.Geometry API is easier to use, perhaps, but that may be because it is more familiar.

Currently they are both supported.

Which one you use is up to you.

three.js r.67

answered May 12 '14 at 14:01

WestLangley

should new apps start with `THREE.BufferGeometry` by default ? – Ciprian Tomoiagă Nov 27 '16 at 17:18
1

@CiprianTomoiaga If you use `Geometry`, the renderer will create a `BufferGeometry` internally anyway. Use `BufferGeometry` if you can. three.js r.82 – WestLangley Nov 27 '16 at 18:13

1 Answers1