Actually, Gabe Newell at last year's CES (last January) was talking about NVIDIA Maxwell architecture. He claims NVIDIA will allow GPU virtualization for gaming applications. In other words, one PC could power multiple netbooks or Roku-style Steam boxes.
That said, split-screen (even multi-monitor "split-screen") is cool and occasionally occurs in PC games.
"Perpetual Motion Engine" can operate on the FILE protocol. You can point the web browser to a web page located on your hard drive (or a USB thumb drive) and it will work.
It can be run from a website over HTTP, but does not need to be. Heck, you could even burn it to a DVD and double-click the index.html file in it.
Actually the demo doesn't raytrace. In this demo "scene" (one triangle) it uses barycentric coordinates to determine if a pixel is inside or outside of a triangle. If it is inside? It shades it with one of two functions. These two functions derive red, green, and blue from how far the pixel is away from a vertex compared to the distance between that vertex and the center of the opposite edge (the animated function also has a time component). If it is outside the triangle? Pixel is skipped.
The specific algorithm is somewhat irrelevant (although it is actually pretty efficient for very large triangles). The point is that the GPUs are not limited to scanline triangles passed by a graphics API anymore.
Because a GeForce Titan has about 2700 cores and about 4.5 teraflops of performance.
But yes, even CPUs have OpenCL drivers so (albeit Intel's is buggy as heck for the time being) so you could even select your CPU as your "graphics processor" and it would run... just slowly.
Only if you want it to! You can share resources between OpenCL and OpenGL without passing through the CPU.
Now, of course, you may wish to (example: copy to APU memory, run physics, copy to GPU memory, render)... but the programmer needs to explicitly queue a memory move command to do so. If the programmer doesn't move the content... it stays on wherever it is.
It's getting much closer. Most ASM.js demos show C++-compiled-into-Javascript is only half performance of native C++ (and getting faster). That's a difference between 30fps and 60fps if all code was Javascript. WebCL, on the other hand, is almost exactly OpenCL speeds... so for GPU-accelerated apps (depending on whether Javascript or WebCL is your primary bottleneck) you could get almost native performance.
SmallPtGPU, from the testing I did a while ago, seems to be almost the same speed whether run in WebCL via Javascript or OpenCL via C++
Some want to use the same algorithms OpenGL and DirectX does... and those APIs are still for them.
Some do not. A good example is Epic Games who, in 2008, predicted "100% of the rendering code" for Unreal Engine 4 would be programmed directly for the GPUs. The next year they found the cost prohibitive so they kept with DirectX and OpenGL at least for a while longer. Especially for big production houses, if there is a bug or a quirk in the rendering code, it would be nice to be able to fix the problem directly rather than hack in a workaround.
Actually, I look at web browsers as an art platform. It is programmed by a set of open standards which gives any person or organization the tools to build support for the content which is relevant to society. A video game, designed in web standards, could be preserved for centuries by whoever deems it culturally relevant.
For once, we have a gaming platform (besides Linux and BSD) which allows genuine, timeless art. If the W3C, or an industry body like them, creates an equivalent pseudo-native app platform... then great. For now, the web is the best we have.
Not only that, but that is roughly 2000$ of license fees (~$10/game + 50$/yr * 10 years + "tons of peripherals and crap" which I'll conservatively say is $500) that you did not need to pay if you didn't game on a console.
And once your consoles break and are out of support... all that money has nothing to run on.
Not only is it not profitable for Microsoft and Sony... but customers, like you, who overpaid for disposable content.
The ironic part is that an X86 instruction hasn't been mapped to dedicated hardware for decades. It just signals a series of micro-ops to perform the calculation.
That started back when we were still doing most of our applications in assembly... and people were begging Intel for the most arbitrary of operations in-silicon.
Then of course when we switched to compilers only about 10% of those operations were used 90% of the time... which is why ARM got so efficient and cheap... because they built their committee around that Turing-complete small set of instructions that compilers would most likely use... rather than Intel's obfuscation to make assembly programmers not want to light themselves up in a gas fire.
Actually it is a bit bigger of a problem than that.
There actually is a form of assembly language for GPUs. NVIDIA has PTX... I don't know what ATi/AMD's is called but I saw some of it in passing.
The actual problem from my perspective is that the assembly language is modified and optimized by the drivers before it reaches the chip. The assembly-style PTX code you send to the drivers does not relate to the machine code which the GPU executes. That kind-of defeats the purpose of the assembly language.
That seems to be one of the reasons why you see people like John Carmack who do unique things always complain about boxing GPU drivers... and why it is so difficult to virtualize a GPU. Maybe that will be solved starting with GK110? We will have to find out exactly what makes NVIDIA's latest part so easy to run through a VM to figure that out unfortunately. Hopefully it means the end of ridiculously complicated drivers.
Samsung is a big developer of processors and one of the world's few FABs actually. ((I actually forgot to mention Qualcomm as an absentee for some reason -- they're a big no-show too.))
Though Apple, I agree, is little love lost. They design chips... but barely; they would not really contribute much to this arrangement; and if they sink by excluding themselves then it will only be them to be hurt in that deal.
The original owner is potentially deprived of compensation for the service of providing the copy to you.
Of course notice how that is still not theft, and how I mentioned potentially. But the original owner is potentially deprived of that.
Of course then we need to get into whether the copy would have been made or the content would have been outright ignored without piracy... and whether the act of pirating the content will push the pirate to purchase content (s)he would otherwise have not purchased. Etc. etc. etc.
So you're not entirely correct... but anti-piracy groups are much much moreso not correct. Just google "Monty Python 23000%" or "comic 4chan watches sales soar" for examples of how piracy leads to sales which otherwise would have not occurred... and "Ubisoft Piracy and the death of reason" for an example of how a lack of piracy and methods used to control piracy HURT revenue.
Hey, eventually one day people may realize... control does not scale with revenue... and you often need to sacrifice one for the other... and to stop blaming the lack of the latter on the perceived lack of the former -- rather the superabundance of the former.
Nah... it sounds like Apple just was complacent and didn't care about patching a vulnerability that they knew about because they felt their engineer was better utilized for some other task.
Because that's how it always is for Apple. Security when we get around to it.
Re:Could Someone Help Me Out With This?
on
Debt Deal Reached
·
· Score: 1
Except when those other people help your children later... there's too much zero-sum mindset in a non zero-sum community.
Because tampering with evidence is a crime... possibly a felony... and some cases is 20 years + 250,000$ -- maybe more, but that's the largest I've seen.
If you are spending more than GDP, GDP might grow and overtake the rate you WERE spending on GDP.
By your logic it's impossible to start a business... because you need to spend more than you make you will never make any money as a business starts with zero revenue by definition.
Slashdot Mirror
The first step to finding a solution is admitting you have a problem. That's where we start.
Correction: homeopathic thing + anything else = anything else + water
Actually, Gabe Newell at last year's CES (last January) was talking about NVIDIA Maxwell architecture. He claims NVIDIA will allow GPU virtualization for gaming applications. In other words, one PC could power multiple netbooks or Roku-style Steam boxes.
That said, split-screen (even multi-monitor "split-screen") is cool and occasionally occurs in PC games.
Fir..! Dangit : ( Guess not.
"Perpetual Motion Engine" can operate on the FILE protocol. You can point the web browser to a web page located on your hard drive (or a USB thumb drive) and it will work.
It can be run from a website over HTTP, but does not need to be. Heck, you could even burn it to a DVD and double-click the index.html file in it.
Actually the demo doesn't raytrace. In this demo "scene" (one triangle) it uses barycentric coordinates to determine if a pixel is inside or outside of a triangle. If it is inside? It shades it with one of two functions. These two functions derive red, green, and blue from how far the pixel is away from a vertex compared to the distance between that vertex and the center of the opposite edge (the animated function also has a time component). If it is outside the triangle? Pixel is skipped.
The specific algorithm is somewhat irrelevant (although it is actually pretty efficient for very large triangles). The point is that the GPUs are not limited to scanline triangles passed by a graphics API anymore.
Because a GeForce Titan has about 2700 cores and about 4.5 teraflops of performance.
But yes, even CPUs have OpenCL drivers so (albeit Intel's is buggy as heck for the time being) so you could even select your CPU as your "graphics processor" and it would run... just slowly.
Only if you want it to! You can share resources between OpenCL and OpenGL without passing through the CPU.
Now, of course, you may wish to (example: copy to APU memory, run physics, copy to GPU memory, render)... but the programmer needs to explicitly queue a memory move command to do so. If the programmer doesn't move the content... it stays on wherever it is.
It's getting much closer. Most ASM.js demos show C++-compiled-into-Javascript is only half performance of native C++ (and getting faster). That's a difference between 30fps and 60fps if all code was Javascript. WebCL, on the other hand, is almost exactly OpenCL speeds... so for GPU-accelerated apps (depending on whether Javascript or WebCL is your primary bottleneck) you could get almost native performance.
SmallPtGPU, from the testing I did a while ago, seems to be almost the same speed whether run in WebCL via Javascript or OpenCL via C++
Some want to use the same algorithms OpenGL and DirectX does... and those APIs are still for them.
Some do not. A good example is Epic Games who, in 2008, predicted "100% of the rendering code" for Unreal Engine 4 would be programmed directly for the GPUs. The next year they found the cost prohibitive so they kept with DirectX and OpenGL at least for a while longer. Especially for big production houses, if there is a bug or a quirk in the rendering code, it would be nice to be able to fix the problem directly rather than hack in a workaround.
Actually, I look at web browsers as an art platform. It is programmed by a set of open standards which gives any person or organization the tools to build support for the content which is relevant to society. A video game, designed in web standards, could be preserved for centuries by whoever deems it culturally relevant.
For once, we have a gaming platform (besides Linux and BSD) which allows genuine, timeless art. If the W3C, or an industry body like them, creates an equivalent pseudo-native app platform... then great. For now, the web is the best we have.
Some quarters they make a lot of money, other quarters they lose a lot of money; net is pretty near zero over the whole console life-cycle.
Had they not wasted so much money and worked on an open platform, they would have steady profits almost the entire time.
(2) Seems to be the theme of the last two generations.
Not only that, but that is roughly 2000$ of license fees (~$10/game + 50$/yr * 10 years + "tons of peripherals and crap" which I'll conservatively say is $500) that you did not need to pay if you didn't game on a console.
And once your consoles break and are out of support... all that money has nothing to run on.
Not only is it not profitable for Microsoft and Sony... but customers, like you, who overpaid for disposable content.
The ironic part is that an X86 instruction hasn't been mapped to dedicated hardware for decades. It just signals a series of micro-ops to perform the calculation.
That started back when we were still doing most of our applications in assembly... and people were begging Intel for the most arbitrary of operations in-silicon.
Then of course when we switched to compilers only about 10% of those operations were used 90% of the time... which is why ARM got so efficient and cheap... because they built their committee around that Turing-complete small set of instructions that compilers would most likely use... rather than Intel's obfuscation to make assembly programmers not want to light themselves up in a gas fire.
So I guess... sort of a bad example?
Actually it is a bit bigger of a problem than that.
There actually is a form of assembly language for GPUs. NVIDIA has PTX... I don't know what ATi/AMD's is called but I saw some of it in passing.
The actual problem from my perspective is that the assembly language is modified and optimized by the drivers before it reaches the chip. The assembly-style PTX code you send to the drivers does not relate to the machine code which the GPU executes. That kind-of defeats the purpose of the assembly language.
That seems to be one of the reasons why you see people like John Carmack who do unique things always complain about boxing GPU drivers... and why it is so difficult to virtualize a GPU. Maybe that will be solved starting with GK110? We will have to find out exactly what makes NVIDIA's latest part so easy to run through a VM to figure that out unfortunately. Hopefully it means the end of ridiculously complicated drivers.
Samsung is a big developer of processors and one of the world's few FABs actually. ((I actually forgot to mention Qualcomm as an absentee for some reason -- they're a big no-show too.)) Though Apple, I agree, is little love lost. They design chips... but barely; they would not really contribute much to this arrangement; and if they sink by excluding themselves then it will only be them to be hurt in that deal.
Yeah... the list of major absentees is NVIDIA, Apple, Samsung, and Intel. Pretty big holes... but pretty big names present too. We shall see.
Hah -- yeah I noticed that just after I clicked submit. Somehow I missed it while I was writing it and previewing it. Oh well.
The original owner is potentially deprived of compensation for the service of providing the copy to you.
Of course notice how that is still not theft, and how I mentioned potentially. But the original owner is potentially deprived of that.
Of course then we need to get into whether the copy would have been made or the content would have been outright ignored without piracy... and whether the act of pirating the content will push the pirate to purchase content (s)he would otherwise have not purchased. Etc. etc. etc.
So you're not entirely correct... but anti-piracy groups are much much moreso not correct. Just google "Monty Python 23000%" or "comic 4chan watches sales soar" for examples of how piracy leads to sales which otherwise would have not occurred... and "Ubisoft Piracy and the death of reason" for an example of how a lack of piracy and methods used to control piracy HURT revenue.
Hey, eventually one day people may realize... control does not scale with revenue... and you often need to sacrifice one for the other... and to stop blaming the lack of the latter on the perceived lack of the former -- rather the superabundance of the former.
Nah... it sounds like Apple just was complacent and didn't care about patching a vulnerability that they knew about because they felt their engineer was better utilized for some other task.
Because that's how it always is for Apple. Security when we get around to it.
Except when those other people help your children later... there's too much zero-sum mindset in a non zero-sum community.
Because tampering with evidence is a crime... possibly a felony... and some cases is 20 years + 250,000$ -- maybe more, but that's the largest I've seen.
No.
If you are spending more than GDP, GDP might grow and overtake the rate you WERE spending on GDP.
By your logic it's impossible to start a business... because you need to spend more than you make you will never make any money as a business starts with zero revenue by definition.