|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
>> Speed: 23.2 million iterations per second (512x512 points in parallel per
>> frame at 88 fps)
>>
>> This is on an nVidia FX1700, if I get time I'll try it on my FX7900
>> tonight,
>> should be significantly faster.
>
> OK so my FX7900 wasn't that much faster (37 million per second), despite
> the specs indicating about 5x the pixel throughput. The speed
> bottleneck is obviously somewhere else in this code then, probably in
> the texture lookup in the vertex shader, I guess that isn't very
> optimised yet. If I had a DX10 card I could use a geometry shader to
> cut the number of texture lookups and vertex shader calls by a factor of
> 4, that would definitely speed things up significantly.
Ooo... profiling GPU code... THAT SOUNDS FUN! o_O
>> I don't know how this compares to how fast a CPU would be, if I get time
>> later I will try out the same on the CPU for comparison.
>
> Using a single core of an Intel E6400 I get 11 million iterations per
> second (C++, but with no graphics).
Mmm, OK.
> Also it took me like 5 minutes to write the CPU code from scratch, but
> several hours to get the GPU code working correctly!
Heh. All hail the day when GHC has a GPU backend! ;-)
(Mind you, apparently Roman Cheplyaka is working on a physics engine
using Data Parallel Haskell as a Google SoC project. Apparently rigid
body collision is working already...)
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |