Topographic variation does not have a significant impact on the performance of flow routing, so we benchmark flow routing solely on real terrains. We compare our algorithm against:
7.3.2. Flow routing
- • Barnes [Bar19], who provides a GPU algorithm for flow routing based on a pre-ordering of the computation graph.
- • Schott et al. [SPF+23], who use a GPU algorithm similar to ours, but without pointer jumping, which results in as many iterations as the node length of the longest river in the terrain ().
Note that neither of these algorithms provides a solution for depression routing on the GPU. The results are illustrated in Figure 18, with an average speed-up of , , and against [Bar19] for each target resolution, respectively.
Figure 18: Performance of our flow routing against [Bar19] and [SPF+23]. The figure consists of four bar charts for terrain resolutions: 512x512, 1024x1024, 2048x2048, and 4096x4096. Each chart compares three methods: Ours (blue), [Bar19] (green), and [SPF+23] (light blue). The y-axis represents Time in milliseconds on a logarithmic scale. Ours consistently shows the lowest times across all resolutions and terrain types (Synthetic 1%, 5%, 15%, Real, Flat).
Figure 18: Performance of our flow routing against [Bar19] and [SPF+23].