home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: informatik.tu-muenchen.de!fischerj
- From: fischerj@informatik.tu-muenchen.de (Juergen "Rally" Fischer)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer
- Subject: Re: TMapping again!
- Date: 17 Jan 1996 19:34:53 GMT
- Organization: Technische Universitaet Muenchen, Germany
- Distribution: world
- Message-ID: <4djj0t$4ni@sunsystem5.informatik.tu-muenchen.de>
- References: <4d0ou6$835@astfgl.idb.hist.no> <Z31Wx*zA0@mkmk.in-chemnitz.de> <4d42di$9e9@maureen.teleport.com> <4d5lvi$emc@brachio.zrz.TU-Berlin.DE> <4d6v0t$3dt@maureen.teleport.com>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: hphalle5.informatik.tu-muenchen.de
- Originator: fischerj@hphalle5.informatik.tu-muenchen.de
-
-
-
- In article <4d6v0t$3dt@maureen.teleport.com>, sschaem@teleport.com (Stephan Schaem) writes:
- |> Organization: Teleport - Portland's Public Access (503) 220-1016
- |> Lines: 56
- |> Message-ID: <4d6v0t$3dt@maureen.teleport.com>
- |> References: <4d0ou6$835@astfgl.idb.hist.no> <Z31Wx*zA0@mkmk.in-chemnitz.de> <4d42di$9e9@maureen.teleport.com> <4d5lvi$emc@brachio.zrz.TU-Berlin.DE>
- |> NNTP-Posting-Host: kelly.teleport.com
- |> X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
- |>
- |> Philipp Boerker (rawneiha@w352zrz.zrz.TU-Berlin.DE) wrote:
- |> : sschaem@teleport.com (Stephan Schaem) writes:
- |>
- |> : >Andre Weissflog (floh@mkmk.in-chemnitz.de) wrote:
- |> : >: In article <4d0ou6$835@astfgl.idb.hist.no>, Lasse Staff Jensen writes:
- |>
-
- |>
- |> AAAAAA..........BBBBBCCCCCCDDDDD
- |>
- |> A = x fraction
- |> B = y integer
- |> C = y fraction
- |> D = x integer
- |> . = zero or more precision for x
- |>
- |> Has you see the example above work...
-
- uhm has anyone actually seen the mapper work ? IMHO the fact that
- CCCCCC y fraction also causes an adress, this could be used imho
- for smoother mapping!
-
- I guess you normally use 32 equal pixels, but if you'd use 32 values
- beeing interpolated between 2 pix of the "real 32x32 map", then it
- should give you interpolation for free!
-
- maybe a outzoomed polygon looks better with it.
-
- |> : Yes, I agree. Sharon, one of the coders of matrix, is actually a
- |> : PC coder but his polygon engine on a 33 MHz 486 is slower than
- |> : our (Sharon, Grond, Skyphos all/matrix) engine on a 25 MHz 030!
- |> : And think of not having chunky screens, not having L2 cache,
- |> : not having 8kb L1 cache...
- |> : That's the power of a large register set!
-
- well is you polyengine still faster using 8 planes ? ;)
- he got a non-local-bus vga ? ;)
-
- It depends on the routine if a large register set is needed.
- inner loops can live with x86 chipset, but when it comes to
- 2st outer, the L1 caches have to play the role of a larger
- register set.
-
- my friend always agures that you could see the cache as big register
- set on intel, but I disagree, a mapper loads so much from mem that
- your variables in cache are bombed by the texture data (and afaik
- even instruction code is bombed by it as there is AFAIK no separate
- instruction cache on 486).
-
- |>
- |> The x86 design is just crap... it would still be crap with more register :)
-
- heehee ;)
-
- |>
- |> : Gee, how am I waiting for the 32 regs of the PPC... 8)
- |>
- |> Well, you are trading your nice addressing mode for this,
- |> no more (offset,base,offset*scale) ;) You will probably need
- |> an extra register and 3 instruction to emulate this on a ppc.
- argh ?
-
- |> And not all 32 register are for you to play with ... dont know
- |> the PPC so I wont go into details :)
- |>
- |> Stephan
- |>
- |>
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
- fischerj@Informatik.TU-Muenchen.DE (Juergen "Rally" Fischer) =:)
-
-