Humus - Comments

More pages: 1 ... 11 ... 21 ... 31 ... 41 ... 51 ... 61 ... 71 ... 81 ... 91 ... 101 ... 111 ... 121 ... 131 ... 141 ... 151 ... 161 ... 171 ... 181 ... 191 ... 201 ... 211 ... 221 ... 231 ... 241 ... 251 ... 261 ... 271 ... 281 ... 291 ... 301 ... 311 ... 321 ... 331 ... 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 ... 351 ... 361 ... 371 ... 381 ... 391 ... 401 ... 411 ... 421 ... 431 ... 438

Query FailedNadja
Saturday, August 7, 2004

hihi

Brandlnator
Thursday, August 5, 2004

the effect looks nice, but is not usable in games.
@all without hlsl support: install the damn latest drivers and stop spamming...

MesserFuerFrauSchmid
Wednesday, August 4, 2004

XNA and D3D will likely merge into WGF for Longhorn (guess someone was not following to well at Meltdown

)

Humus
Wednesday, August 4, 2004

Well, if the bottleneck is in the vertex pipeline, then this technique will be a slowdown. If on the other hand the fragment shader is the bottleneck, then this technique will be a speed-up. How large of an increase you get depends on how complex the fragment shader is. The more complex, the higher the gain of using this technique.

Vitiy
Tuesday, August 3, 2004

Humus - RESPECT!

btw// To use with Ati mobility 9600/9700 download latest drivers and modify them with:

http://www.driverheaven.net/patje/files/Dhmodtool1.7.exe

Humus
Tuesday, August 3, 2004

I guess it could be a cool thing, but I don't know enough about it. I get the impression that it's more or less just a bigger version of D3DX.

NeoKenobi
Monday, August 2, 2004

Looks like a cool event to me. Btw. How do you think about Microsoft's XNA?

Graham
Sunday, August 1, 2004

I thought you might be interested, but I gave this technique a try in my own code... And the results were fairly interesting...

I mostly use a Q3 bsp loader to test the lighting system... The lighting itself is fairly simple, per-pixel with specular, with very heavily optimized stencil-shadows. No fancy things like paralax.

I was expecting a measurable speed boost. I only managed this in one case...

in chiroptera, I managed to get a boost of around 15% when in a random coner looking at a wall with my spotlight.. but this was the only case.
In every other place in the map, I'd get a slight performance hit...

On a small simple map with no normal lights (just spotlight) I could break even, but not see a boost..

And on my mega-test, running nv15, the extra triangles required really hurt things.. Standing at the far coner, with nearly 300 lights on screen, with stencil-shadows, the polygon count was around 2 million for the scene... using this technique it jumps another half million triangles, which naturally cut the frame rate by about a third. (radeon 9500p, 640x480 -> ~6fps goes down to ~4fps)

so I'm wondering, in this demo, for each light do you simply render the entire scene again? I can understand this giving a noticable perforamnce boost, but it would seem in a real world case, where there is already a lot of culling going on the extra triangles simply shift the bottleneck...

*however*
if I were to pull out my old paralax shaders, (which used 5 layers

- then there might be a noticable difference.. Just I don't know if I still have them since it's been over a year since I scrapped them since they were too slow...

Anywho

still is a nice demo

have fun.


General
	News 3D Pictures Textures Articles Cool stuff
Other
	FAQ About Humus
Other 3D sites
	OpenGL.org GameDev.net Beyond3D Rage3D
Programming info
	OpenGL extension registry NeHe