It’s not a project, it’s a material and material function; both of which you can implement with your own materials. Me uploading a version of it with 2k or 4k textures isn’t going to change how it performs… You can plug anything into them and get the exact same results. The screenshots don’t have to look pretty… At the core, they are doing EXACTLY the same amount of math that would occur if I used fancy textures in them and painted the layers to be more “visually functional,” as in painting out roads or blend transitions, etc etc. If I did go through and hand-paint all of that stuff, while still ensuring every component had 10 layers painted on it, it would yield the exact same frame rate.
I simply made a 2x2km landscape, with 1024 components(2017x2017 overall resolution), and applied 10 layers in blend mode; with an opacity of 5% to ensure every component contained 10 layers worth of blending information(I made sure to set the first layer to fill with 100% so that everything after that would blend into it). The shader is indifferent to what RGBA goes into it and the test result doesn’t have to look pretty. Functionally, it’s still the same benchmark.
Lastly, you can take that attitude somewhere else. I’d advise you to do some research on cognitive biases because it’s a huge problem in the “engineering” worlds(I’m an electro-mechanical engineer) and holds people back:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases
Then upload it proper or you’re not helping. Everyone else has said they’ve had a problem. You’re saying you have a solution on hand. Share it. Saying everything is fine without sharing your solution is meaningless. In our own materials we’re seeing major performance hits. Plenty of people have posted evidence of those issues. You’ve been dismissive from your first post, acting like in the thread is an idiot when it comes to optimization but you.