Pixel Shader 2.0 in software
by Jarrod Roberson · in Technical Issues · 12/18/2003 (6:42 am) · 7 replies
I found this article. Seems interesting for all those that are interested in Shaders but don't have compliant hardware or it might make a good test harness.
What I am researching right now is how to have as flexible shader support as possible. Software Pixel Shader 2.0 support might be an option. I just have to figure out how to architect the render pipeline so that I don't have to do any specialized coding to support software vs hardware shaders. I would want them to "look" the same to the pipeline externally.
Damn a fire alarm is going off in the building . . . finish this later!
What I am researching right now is how to have as flexible shader support as possible. Software Pixel Shader 2.0 support might be an option. I just have to figure out how to architect the render pipeline so that I don't have to do any specialized coding to support software vs hardware shaders. I would want them to "look" the same to the pipeline externally.
Damn a fire alarm is going off in the building . . . finish this later!
About the author
#2
I think PS2.0 cards are cheaper than 3Ghz processors by a long shot so this is low priority for my graphics pipeline, I just want to take it into account during design even if it gets an low priority in implemenation.
I thought it might make a good test/debug harness, or maybe let you preview shaders inside of your modeling program etc.
The guy that wrote that article contributed to the ShaderX2 book(s).
12/18/2003 (7:58 am)
False alarm . . . that is the fire anyway.I think PS2.0 cards are cheaper than 3Ghz processors by a long shot so this is low priority for my graphics pipeline, I just want to take it into account during design even if it gets an low priority in implemenation.
I thought it might make a good test/debug harness, or maybe let you preview shaders inside of your modeling program etc.
The guy that wrote that article contributed to the ShaderX2 book(s).
#3
Trouble is it's usually faster to "paint" the screen with a physical brush and paint than wait for the ref device to render anything ;)
The recently alphaed ShaderWorks seems to be a great way of building / prototyping shaders. Although it's not finished yet, it looks like there may be a substantial time saving using that than writing your own shader visualisation / testing paths.
12/18/2003 (8:27 am)
There may be benefits in debugging. But all the shader 'bugs' i've come across have been related to the card itself not my code. The directX REF render device allows full debugging of shaders. The approach in the books seems to be along the lines of allowing better shader features via the CPU by removing the GPU problems.Trouble is it's usually faster to "paint" the screen with a physical brush and paint than wait for the ref device to render anything ;)
The recently alphaed ShaderWorks seems to be a great way of building / prototyping shaders. Although it's not finished yet, it looks like there may be a substantial time saving using that than writing your own shader visualisation / testing paths.
#4
12/18/2003 (9:01 am)
The software OpenGL renderer in MacOS X, especially the latest one in Panther, supports the whole 1.4 OpenGL spec in software if your hardware renderer doesn't...
#5
This post just saved me a couple hundred man hours coding?
12/18/2003 (9:07 am)
Man how did I miss that! This will DEFINATELY make it into my toolbox as soon as the holidays are over with!This post just saved me a couple hundred man hours coding?
#6
ShaderWorks XT and Mad F/X are up for grabs!
That really sucks.
Kinda feels like he gave up just before the finish line though!
12/23/2003 (6:21 am)
Afraid not:ShaderWorks XT and Mad F/X are up for grabs!
That really sucks.
Kinda feels like he gave up just before the finish line though!
#7
12/23/2003 (6:44 am)
Man that really does suck, I hope at least someone picks up where he left off those are much needed tools! 
Torque 3D Owner Gareth Davies
It's a nice idea, but personally my processor budget can't take such a large kick in the teeth. What's more common PS2.0 cards or 3Ghz+ processors?
Good article though. ShaderX2 is a great book (there's two X2's, i've only seen the advanced one so far).