Because I am a Chromebook (browser) developer (Unity on desktop), I can’t access tilemaps. Because of this, I use tiled sprites. The problem with this is that they are very large and cannot be culled. They also do lots of calculations to tile. All of my tiled sprites are in multiples of 64, so my question is, is it more performant to at the start of the scene, replace all of my tiled sprites with many normal sprites stacked next to each other?
[BUMP] [CHARACTER FILLER] apparently needs to be a sentence.
My gut instinct says yes, it’ll be better to do it that way, particularly with larger tiled sprites because of the computations and processing involved.
You could test this by creating a simple project that has quite a number of large tiled sprites and observing the FPS on it, and then replacing the tiled sprites with standard sprites and seeing if there’s a notable difference.
Thx for the suggestion 
!
Umm, I’m stuck at a constant 30 fps for both. Help?
Nvm. As it turns out, using a tiled sprite is WAY more efficient than having thousands of normal sprites. Tested in on screen, partially on screen, and not on screen.
Generally the answer will be “it depends”.
If the tiled sprite is static (non moving), the source image size isn’t too big, and it’s only set to a power of 2 total size? It can be more efficient than a bunch of instances of the same sprite.
If the tiled sprite has any changing features at all (location, rotation, scaling, etc), the base image is very large, or GPU memory is at a premium and culling is needed? Tiled sprite will be the worst efficiency out of sprite instances/tilemap/tiled sprites. My understanding is due to the heavy math involved for a tiled sprite ends up being much more tha.
Go with what works for your specific scenario, as there sadly isn’t a one-size-fits-all solution for object type efficiency.