71–80 of 148 posts
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/m1-m2-flickering-ghosti...
https://www.benq.com/en-us/knowledge-center/knowledge/how-to...
https://www.howtogeek.com/805459/mac-flickering-external-scr...
Does the complex block in the diagram refer to complex numbers? That doesn't sound typical, does it? What type of work load that typically run on the GPU that would require complex numbers?
FFT plus some game stuff requires complex numbers to do partial rendering (e.g. do some now and then do more next frame - I've lost the link to the talk but IIRC EA did a talk on how they made a shader that emulates lights in the background that are out of focus (not Guassian but the actual cool effect as if it was a real camera))
edit: Found the article: https://www.ea.com/frostbite/news/circular-separable-convolu...
It’s amazing how bad the competition is. The A17 pro has 2 performance cores and 4 efficiency cores. The Google G3 has 9 cores of 3 different types, the fastest being slower than Apple’s performance cores, the most efficient being less efficient than apple’s efficiency cores. And it’s a phone so you don’t take advantage of the extra parallelism. You just get the worst of both worlds. no wonder these android phones ha…
A big part of Apple's "winning formula" is taking their giant piles of money and negotiating exclusive contracts for whatever is scheduled to be the most advanced semiconductor node next year. Anyone else literally cannot compete, they don't have billions in pocket change they don't know how to spend otherwise, so they'll have to wait until the exclusivity agreement expires.
your parent comment's example is literally Google, world-class experts at burning money on developers producing a million dead-end products and abandoning them a year later.
if Google would get some sensible leadership, focus on a few core products, and stick with them for a decade, they'd have just as much money to spend. But "focus" and "Google" seem to have become opposites.
My point: the 'winning formula' of Apple is laser-sharp focus: have a few products, do them as well as anyone else or better, and only introduce a new product if it is mature-ish and very profitable. (We'll see how the vision headset fits in here)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
FFT plus some game stuff requires complex numbers to do partial rendering (e.g. do some now and then do more next frame - I've lost the link to the talk but IIRC EA did a talk on how they made a shader that emulates lights in the background that are out of focus (not Guassian but the actual cool effect as if it was a real camera))
bokeh? edit: Found the article: https://www.ea.com/frostbite/news/circular-separable-convolu...
I skimmed the video but a lot of it sounded more like advertising than technical information to me. On the other hand, I'm looking forward to watching the Asahi folks crack this stuff open.
It is an overview of what is new about their hardware and technical advice (but not overly technical) on how to maximize the GPUs performance. I watched the full video and thought it was excellent. I wish other CPU/GPU manufacturers made technical overview videos like this. I've never programmed graphics targeting metal before, but I feel much more inclined after watching this so I guess it was good advertising.
Have you dived into them?
The video is just enough of a peek into the GPU's to encourage people to write using Metal API's (and by the way, use the new APIs and FP16).
They should just support directx. Devs will never support two graphics api’s. it costs too much especially to grab the marginal mac os share that has powerful enough gpu’s. Id bed in 4 years apple moves to directx.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I guess parent forgot "on macOS and iOS". Technically every game on macOS or iOS is running on Metal, because the Apple OpenGL implementations are also running on top of Metal for quite a while now ;) Across platforms, there's no chance in hell that more games run on Metal than DirectX, not even when counting iOS shovelware.
Metal owns a significantly bigger market for gaming revenue than DirectX.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Probably, but that's a completely different claim from your first, isn't it?
There are also more games on Metal than DirectX. And when I say DirectX, I meant the latest versions of DirectX. No idea what the count is for all games released for DirectX total. It's not relevant for the topic I was replying to. The OP said Apple should switch to DirectX. They can't because it's closed source. The reason given was that devs won't support 2 APIs. They already do. They support DirectX and Vulcan (PS…
Also many developers support even more than 2, as you are fogetting Playstation and Switch, both of which with their own APIs, 2 for Playstayon (GNM and GNMX), 3 for Switch (NVN, Vulkan and OpenGL).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The way that works isn't that IMG ships a full directx implementation, but that they ship some kernel and user mode components that plug in to Microsoft's directx implementation such that when taken together, directx is accelerated by IMG's hardware. Similarly, Microsoft would need to release the non GPU specific bits for macos to fit the same model.
Wow, that sounds like a very impressive level of separation of concerns. May I kindly ask for some links for further reading? If you have any handy.
In kernel space you as the hardware manufacturer implement a display miniport driver, and heavily lean on dxgkrnl.sys
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/drivers/d...
And implement interfaces like this one for D3D12 https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/drivers/d...
There's quite a bit though and it's kind of spread across several sections on MSDN.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The way that works isn't that IMG ships a full directx implementation, but that they ship some kernel and user mode components that plug in to Microsoft's directx implementation such that when taken together, directx is accelerated by IMG's hardware. Similarly, Microsoft would need to release the non GPU specific bits for macos to fit the same model.
Wow, that sounds like a very impressive level of separation of concerns. May I kindly ask for some links for further reading? If you have any handy.