Yeah Darcey ,that is what I think too.But the problem is that the util console doesn't open.I mean it opens ,write some error and shuts down immediately .
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 10:01 AM, Darcey Lloyd <[email protected]>wrote: > Looks like you compile with "pb3dutil.exe" I've not tried compiling > anything with it yet though. > > Params from dos: > pb3dutil [input vertex lernel file name] [output file name] [input material > kernel file name] [material vertex output file name] > > I'm guessing write your stuff up in an editor of your choice and compile > via dos. Possible suggestion when molehill and pb3d is released Away 4.x can > have a selection of pb3d extensions which we can include when needed. or > something along those lines. > > D > > > > On 22 March 2011 07:13, Michael Iv <[email protected]> wrote: > >> In fact ,if you guys are familiar with the new OpenGL 3x (non fixed ) >> pipeline which is solely based on shader programming ,you will find it very >> much similar to how Molehill works.Of course you are right saying that the >> Molehill doesn't have all the OpenGL functionality (it hardly has a fracture >> of it).But because you have got the ability to manipulate buffers data and >> draw the stuff based on frag/vertex programs it means you can do pretty >> everything you can dream of.The only real impediment is all those nasty >> opcodes(unlike GLSL ) .But I personally believe that PixelBender3D will come >> to rescue in this case. >> >> BTW anybody succeeded to compile anything with the beta release of PB3D? I >> downloaded the pack.There is a command line exe in there with several DLLs >> and no proper docs what to do with it except of compile commands.Are we >> supposed to write the program in PB2.5 IDE and then compile with the command >> line Utility? >> >> >> On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 1:21 AM, Brian Bosak <[email protected] >> > wrote: >> >>> Or you could write a virtual OpenGL wrapper for Molehill. Wouldn't be too >>> difficult actually. >>> >>> -----Original Message----- From: Arkadianen >>> Sent: Monday, March 21, 2011 6:05 PM >>> >>> To: Away3D.dev >>> Subject: [away3d] Re: Away3D 4.x - GPU Access >>> >>> Flash doesnt have the purpose to transit OpenGL functions. But if you >>> need some specific functions you can discuss them with Adobe team. >>> YOu can create a separated topic and in future releases they will be >>> implemented. >>> >>> On Mar 20, 5:47 pm, "Brian Bosak" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Yeah. Currently Molehill doesn't support all of the functionality I was >>>> expecting, so I'm transitioning my project over to native OpenGL. Flash >>>> just >>>> isn't quite ready yet, and there's no standard way to even capture the >>>> mouse >>>> cursor, or set the screen resolution. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Arkadianen >>>> Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2011 10:18 AM >>>> To: Away3D.dev >>>> Subject: [away3d] Re: Away3D 4.x - GPU Access >>>> >>>> So latest GPU cards supports even C++ >>>> But we cant use all of its possibilities in Flash, we can use only >>>> methods of ActionScript which use GPU. >>>> I think in future Flash will evolve to larger use of GPU >>>> >>>> On Mar 20, 1:05 am, Michael Iv <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> > And here is more detailed info: >>>> >>>> >http://www.nvidia.com/object/GPU_Computing.html >>>> >>>> > On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 12:39 AM, Michael Iv <[email protected]> >>>> > wrote: >>>> > > This is faster due to the fact the modern graphic(dedicated) cards >>>> > > have >>>> > > hundreds of GPUs executing in parallel .The only issue is the bus >>>> > > between >>>> > > CPU and GPU. the transition of the data to the card and from it is > >>>> > what >>>> > > usually prevents to get the best out of this approach.But still I >>>> > > believe if >>>> > > you architecture the CPU (client side) code the right way you will > >>>> > gain >>>> > > much >>>> > > from it.I did not try it.I am learning PB3D now because I am not >>>> going >>>> > > to >>>> > > suffer doing such a stuff with opcodes.As I wrote today earlier > > >>>> "number >>>> > > crunching "(term to what you want to do ) was already done in PB2d >>>> > > .There is >>>> > > an article on Adobe PixelBender page describing how to send > > >>>> computations >>>> > > to >>>> > > PixelBender and back.Read it,I think it will be helpful .:) >>>> >>>> > > On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 12:28 AM, Arkadianen <[email protected]> >>>> > > wrote: >>>> >>>> > >> This matter is very importnat, because collision detection takes >>>> lots >>>> > >> of CPU. Is GPU able to calculate it faster than CPU? Maybe we could >>>> > >> even write shaders for path finding or other games tasks like AI ? >>>> > >> Did anyone try it? >>>> > >> Having links? >>>> >>>> > >> On Mar 19, 11:11 am, Michael Iv <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> > >> > I am still learning the API but here are some things I can tell >>>> you > >> > : >>>> > >> > Yes you can send the data to the gpu to be calculated . For this >>>> > >> > you >>>> > >> should write a shader program which would get input of soma data >>>> and >>>> > >> return >>>> > >> the calculated result . I think the best way to do that is via pb3d >>>> > >> so >>>> > >> you >>>> > >> don't have to mess around with opcodes. Also this thing was already >>>> > >> done >>>> > >> with the regular pixel bender. There is an article in pb adobe web >>>> > >> page >>>> > >> about number crunching using pb shaders. Just take a look at it >>>> .btw > >> , >>>> > >> the >>>> > >> industry standard physics engines like PhysX and Havok run on GPU >>>> :) >>>> >>>> > >> > Sent from my iPhone >>>> >>>> > >> > On Mar 19, 2011, at 1:34 AM, Darcey Lloyd < >>>> [email protected]> >>>> > >> wrote: >>>> >>>> > >> > > I have just been wandering through some gpu collision detection >>>> > >> articles and was wondering: >>>> >>>> > >> > > Q1). Is there any way to access the GPU for collision detection >>>> > >> queries, freeing the CPU from testing? Or when we do a comparison >>>> > >> between >>>> > >> two vertices does molehill automatically get the GPU to do this? Is >>>> > >> this >>>> > >> possible via stage3D / Context3D? >>>> >>>> > >> > > Q2). How much access do we have to the GPU? >>>> >>>> > >> > > Q3). Would it be possible to have more access to GPU > >> > > >>>> functionality >>>> > >> > > via >>>> > >> pbj objects (Pixelbender)? >>>> >>>> > >> > > D >>>> >>>> > > -- >>>> > > Michael Ivanov ,Programmer >>>> > > Neurotech Solutions Ltd. >>>> > > Flex|Air |3D|Unity| >>>> > >www.neurotechresearch.com >>>> > >http://blog.alladvanced.net >>>> > > Tel:054-4962254 >>>> > > [email protected] >>>> > > [email protected] >>>> >>>> > -- >>>> > Michael Ivanov ,Programmer >>>> > Neurotech Solutions Ltd. >>>> > Flex|Air |3D|Unity|www.neurotechresearch.comhttp:// >>>> blog.alladvanced.net >>>> > Tel:054-4962254 >>>> > [email protected] >>>> > [email protected] >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Michael Ivanov ,Programmer >> Neurotech Solutions Ltd. >> Flex|Air |3D|Unity| >> www.neurotechresearch.com >> http://blog.alladvanced.net >> Tel:054-4962254 >> [email protected] >> [email protected] >> >> > -- Michael Ivanov ,Programmer Neurotech Solutions Ltd. Flex|Air |3D|Unity| www.neurotechresearch.com http://blog.alladvanced.net Tel:054-4962254 [email protected] [email protected]
