So even assuming fill rate could be just as quick using the fast memory copy from Alchemy, it still seems like the per pixel tests/writes will be a net performance loss, potential depth buffer notwithstanding :)
-Ken On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 11:15 AM, David Lenaerts <[email protected]>wrote: > A custom rasterizer has most chances using Alchemy so you can access fast > memory, and copy that from the ByteArray to BitmapData. That way, you could > also create a software depth-buffer or G-buffer at acceptable-ish extra > cost. It'd be an interesting exercise for sure, but I'm not entirely > convinced it'd be more than that :) > > > On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 6:08 PM, Ken Railey <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I don't see why this type of rasterizer would be inherently faster than >> the current one. In most cases fill rate is the bottleneck, meaning that >> you want to get your pixels onto the screen as fast as possible. I would be >> very surprised if someone can find a way to do this faster manually in as3 >> bytecode one pixel at a time than by using the internal flash bitmap drawing >> routines (written in somewhat optimized assembly, IIRC), no matter the >> window size. >> >> The window size is probably not even all that relevant, since *both* >> methods get faster as the rending surface dimensions decrease. >> >> Of course, I would be pleased to be proven wrong :) >> >> -Ken >> >> >> On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 5:38 AM, Nooop <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On Aug 12, 10:18 am, Peter Kapelyan <[email protected]> wrote: >>> > Sorry, what I meant to say is "you can try if you have the courage". >>> > >>> > From any other rendering methods thus far (experimental or not), there >>> has >>> > not been any increase in rendering speeds. There have been some tries >>> with >>> > Pixel Bender, I would love to see a PB solution that's even a tad bit >>> > faster. >>> >>> As I understand, scanline rendering would not be faster in a >>> larger window, but in a very small window it could have a faster frame >>> rate. I think it is limited by the number of pixel. >>> >>> Quake Flash probably using scanline rendering with a good frame >>> rate: >>> http://www.silvergames.com/game/quake-flash/ >>> >>> >>> >>> "Wire Engine 3d" has a scanline rendering option. >>> http://www.3key.at/we3d/forum/ >>> >>> 2600 polygon flat shaded model in a tiny window and a smooth >>> frame rate: >>> http://www.3key.at/we3d/w3sample.html >>> >>> 15,000 triangles with scanline rendering: >>> http://3key.at/we3d/forum/demos/demo1/index.html >>> >>> Flat shaded helicopter model: >>> http://3key.at/we3d/src/samples/1.html >>> >>> >>> >>> >> > > > -- > David Lenaerts > Flash platform developer > http://www.derschmale.com >
