The Partridge Family were neither partridges nor a family. Discuss.
-
npissoawsome
- Posts: 114
- Joined: June 8th, 2012, 3:01 pm
Post
by npissoawsome » October 27th, 2012, 2:43 am
chili wrote:Yup, the string instructions work in 64-bit mode.
Okay sweet, I need to research this instruction lol
Too busy reading nvidia's cuda c manual. We should do some tutorials on OpenCl/cude
-
chili
- Site Admin
- Posts: 3948
- Joined: December 31st, 2011, 4:53 pm
- Location: Japan
-
Contact:
Post
by chili » October 27th, 2012, 2:51 am
Yeah, movsd (and movsq in 64-bit mode) are pretty good when used with the REP prefix. Not as fast as SSE or AVX, but the next best thing.
I actually wouldn't mind doing gpgpu someday (although it has little to do with game dev). I once wrote neuro-genetic simulator that offloaded the synapse step processing to GPU via CUDA. Worked pretty nice.
Chili
-
Asimov
- Posts: 814
- Joined: May 19th, 2012, 11:38 pm
Post
by Asimov » October 27th, 2012, 8:41 am
Hi all,
I am following this thread with interest, but I haven't got a clue what you are talking about LOL
-
npissoawsome
- Posts: 114
- Joined: June 8th, 2012, 3:01 pm
Post
by npissoawsome » October 27th, 2012, 10:25 pm
chili wrote:Yeah, movsd (and movsq in 64-bit mode) are pretty good when used with the REP prefix. Not as fast as SSE or AVX, but the next best thing.
I actually wouldn't mind doing gpgpu someday (although it has little to do with game dev). I once wrote neuro-genetic simulator that offloaded the synapse step processing to GPU via CUDA. Worked pretty nice.
gpgpu would work because you can accelerate your
custom code on your gpu. DirectX is only accelerates it's own code. Like if you used cuda for alpha blending, it would be incredibly fast
-
chili
- Site Admin
- Posts: 3948
- Joined: December 31st, 2011, 4:53 pm
- Location: Japan
-
Contact:
Post
by chili » October 28th, 2012, 1:44 am
Realtime graphics processing works much better (faster) if written as shaders as opposed to a CUDA kernel.
Also, the rasterization engine will do alpha blending faster than any shader program or CUDA solution ever could.
Chili
-
npissoawsome
- Posts: 114
- Joined: June 8th, 2012, 3:01 pm
Post
by npissoawsome » October 28th, 2012, 6:28 am
chili wrote:Realtime graphics processing works much better (faster) if written as shaders as opposed to a CUDA kernel.
assume that mean for graphics DirectX is better to use than CUDA. If so, then yes, I totally agree, I was just saying you can't make custom code to run on your gpu without CUDA or OpenCl
chili wrote:
Also, the rasterization engine will do alpha blending faster than any shader program or CUDA solution ever could.
I have no idea what a rasterization engine is, could you explain?
-
chili
- Site Admin
- Posts: 3948
- Joined: December 31st, 2011, 4:53 pm
- Location: Japan
-
Contact:
Post
by chili » October 31st, 2012, 3:02 pm
Yeah, you can make custom code run on a gpu without gpgpu. That's exactly what a shader is: code you write to run on a gpu.
the rasterizer is the stage that comes after the pixel shader in a modern video card rendering pipeline. it handles writing to the framebuffer.
Chili