Click Here
home features news forums classifieds faqs links search
6049 members 
Amiga Q&A /  Free for All /  Emulation /  Gaming / (Latest Posts)
Login

Nickname

Password

Lost Password?

Don't have an account yet?
Register now!

Support Amigaworld.net
Your support is needed and is appreciated as Amigaworld.net is primarily dependent upon the support of its users.
Donate

Menu
Main sections
» Home
» Features
» News
» Forums
» Classifieds
» Links
» Downloads
Extras
» OS4 Zone
» IRC Network
» AmigaWorld Radio
» Newsfeed
» Top Members
» Amiga Dealers
Information
» About Us
» FAQs
» Advertise
» Polls
» Terms of Service
» Search

IRC Channel
Server: irc.amigaworld.net
Ports: 1024,5555, 6665-6669
SSL port: 6697
Channel: #Amigaworld
Channel Policy and Guidelines

Who's Online
33 crawler(s) on-line.
 38 guest(s) on-line.
 1 member(s) on-line.


 Karlos

You are an anonymous user.
Register Now!
 Karlos:  4 mins ago
 VooDoo:  12 mins ago
 OlafS25:  20 mins ago
 AMIGASYSTEM:  30 mins ago
 Rob:  48 mins ago
 Skateman:  1 hr 9 mins ago
 Comi:  1 hr 14 mins ago
 BigD:  1 hr 28 mins ago
 MichaelMerkel:  1 hr 50 mins ago
 zipper:  1 hr 55 mins ago

/  Forum Index
   /  Amiga Development
      /  Packed Versus Planar: FIGHT
Register To Post

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 Next Page )
PosterThread
cdimauro 
Re: Packed Versus Planar: FIGHT
Posted on 7-Nov-2022 5:35:56
#681 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 29-Oct-2012
Posts: 3097
From: Germany

@Bosanac

Quote:

Bosanac wrote:
@MEGA_RJ_MICAL

Quote:
The self-isolation, endless nights of typing, the angst.


The huge right bicep…

It's "strange" that your "contributes" to some threads where I was involved arrive only on specific chances like this.

Are you still burning as well?

@Massi

Quote:

Massi wrote:
@cdimauro

An influencer like you, with a photo of you of 25-30 years ago in your article.
You may lose followers ...

...and here's Massi which continues to burn and finds no other chance other than getting ridiculous just to satisfy his devastated ego.

My pleasure...

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Massi 
Re: Packed Versus Planar: FIGHT
Posted on 7-Nov-2022 5:47:03
#682 ]
Cult Member
Joined: 2-Feb-2011
Posts: 627
From: Rome, Italy

@cdimauro

Fear that an up to date photo of you may scare the audience, lamer ?

_________________
SAM440EP-FLEX @ 733 Mhz, AmigaOS 4.1 Update 1

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
cdimauro 
Re: Packed Versus Planar: FIGHT
Posted on 7-Nov-2022 5:49:41
#683 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 29-Oct-2012
Posts: 3097
From: Germany

@Massi

Quote:

Massi wrote:
@cdimauro

Fear that an up to date photo of you may scare the audience,

Just simply laziness. I'd do when I'm inspired.
Quote:
lamer ?

Says the one that don't know:

- the difference between a processor and a chipset;
- base Maths;
- elementary logic.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Massi 
Re: Packed Versus Planar: FIGHT
Posted on 7-Nov-2022 6:02:19
#684 ]
Cult Member
Joined: 2-Feb-2011
Posts: 627
From: Rome, Italy

@cdimauro

A photo of 25-30 years ago ...

_________________
SAM440EP-FLEX @ 733 Mhz, AmigaOS 4.1 Update 1

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
cdimauro 
Re: Packed Versus Planar: FIGHT
Posted on 7-Nov-2022 6:05:39
#685 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 29-Oct-2012
Posts: 3097
From: Germany

@Massi

Quote:

Massi wrote:
@cdimauro

A photo of 25-30 years ago ...

FYI (since you can't live with it), the one on my site should have around 15 years. The one on LinkedIn is much more recent (around 5 years).

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Massi 
Re: Packed Versus Planar: FIGHT
Posted on 7-Nov-2022 6:09:59
#686 ]
Cult Member
Joined: 2-Feb-2011
Posts: 627
From: Rome, Italy

@cdimauro

Sembra la foto della prima comunione.
Sorry English readers.

_________________
SAM440EP-FLEX @ 733 Mhz, AmigaOS 4.1 Update 1

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
cdimauro 
Re: Packed Versus Planar: FIGHT
Posted on 7-Nov-2022 6:12:09
#687 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 29-Oct-2012
Posts: 3097
From: Germany

@Massi

Quote:

Massi wrote:
@cdimauro

Sembra la foto della prima comunione.
Sorry English readers.

Isn't my problem? Why do you care about me? I can live with it, but you don't? ROFL

You burn and you continue to feed my pleasure!

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Massi 
Re: Packed Versus Planar: FIGHT
Posted on 7-Nov-2022 6:41:43
#688 ]
Cult Member
Joined: 2-Feb-2011
Posts: 627
From: Rome, Italy

@cdimauro

I was thinking of your followers, cheated by.

You like to appear, what you are not: competent, young and beautiful, ...

_________________
SAM440EP-FLEX @ 733 Mhz, AmigaOS 4.1 Update 1

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Karlos 
Re: Packed Versus Planar: FIGHT
Posted on 7-Nov-2022 13:02:23
#689 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 24-Aug-2003
Posts: 3372
From: As-sassin-aaate! As-sassin-aaate! Ooh! We forgot the ammunition!

Why is everyone getting so bent out of shape here? It's like a kids playground.

Nobody ever implemented odd sized chunky pixels, but if you have any software engineering experience, you can see that almost everything is the same as it would be for a single bitplane planar display. You still have to locate the machine addressable unit of memory (whether that's 8, 16 or 32 bits wide on your bus), load it, mask out your pixel, update the bitfield position that contains it and write back.

The only difference to a single bit plane display is when your pixel's bits span whatever machine size you are using. There is some additional complexity because you need two reads and writes to complete the operation. If this was too egregious you could opt to pack a whole number of N-bit bitfields into a word, such that a pixel never spans such a boundary. This works better for larger word sizes but is still a bit wasteful. For example, assuming a 32-bit word size:

8 colour: 3bpp, 10 pixels, 2 wasted bits per word.
32 colour: 5bpp, 6 pixels, 2 wasted bits per word.
64 colour: 6bpp, 5 pixels, 2 wasted bits per word.
128 colour: 7bpp, 4 pixels, 4 wasted bits per word.

It's clear that 7bpp makes little sense in this scheme, but in a 64 bit wide arrangement you could have 9 pixels and 1 wasted bit per word.

_________________
Doing stupid things for fun...

 Status: Online!
Profile     Report this post  
Hammer 
Re: Packed Versus Planar: FIGHT
Posted on 8-Nov-2022 5:27:54
#690 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 9-Mar-2003
Posts: 4611
From: Australia

@cdimauro

Quote:
Demonstration of what?

Running benchmarks like Quake or Doom.

This topic "Packed Versus Planar" is one of Amiga's post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) topics.

Commodore is aware of "Packed" pixels, hence the half-assed Akiko effort in the Amiga CD32.

_________________
Ryzen 9 7900X, DDR5-6000 32 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti
Amiga 1200 (rev 1D1, KS 3.2, TF1260, 68060 @ 63 Mhz, 128 MB)
Amiga 500 (rev 6A, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi3a/Emu68)

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
cdimauro 
Re: Packed Versus Planar: FIGHT
Posted on 8-Nov-2022 6:14:12
#691 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 29-Oct-2012
Posts: 3097
From: Germany

@Karlos

Quote:

Karlos wrote:
Why is everyone getting so bent out of shape here? It's like a kids playground.

Nobody ever implemented odd sized chunky pixels, but if you have any software engineering experience, you can see that almost everything is the same as it would be for a single bitplane planar display. You still have to locate the machine addressable unit of memory (whether that's 8, 16 or 32 bits wide on your bus), load it, mask out your pixel, update the bitfield position that contains it and write back.

The only difference to a single bit plane display is when your pixel's bits span whatever machine size you are using. There is some additional complexity because you need two reads and writes to complete the operation.

+2
Quote:
If this was too egregious you could opt to pack a whole number of N-bit bitfields into a word, such that a pixel never spans such a boundary. This works better for larger word sizes but is still a bit wasteful. For example, assuming a 32-bit word size:

8 colour: 3bpp, 10 pixels, 2 wasted bits per word.
32 colour: 5bpp, 6 pixels, 2 wasted bits per word.
64 colour: 6bpp, 5 pixels, 2 wasted bits per word.
128 colour: 7bpp, 4 pixels, 4 wasted bits per word.

It's clear that 7bpp makes little sense in this scheme, but in a 64 bit wide arrangement you could have 9 pixels and 1 wasted bit per word.

Unfortunately then it becomes less efficient.

Having everything fully packed IMO it's also simpler, because you can treat the data as a pure stream of bytes, and both the display controller and the Blitter have barrel shifters which are already doing the operation of "joining" all data like it's a pure sequence of bits.


@Hammer

Quote:

Hammer wrote:
@cdimauro

Quote:
Demonstration of what?

Running benchmarks like Quake or Doom.

Not needed: it was already proven by Maths.
Quote:
This topic "Packed Versus Planar" is one of Amiga's post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) topics.

Probably.
Quote:
Commodore is aware of "Packed" pixels, hence the half-assed Akiko effort in the Amiga CD32.

It was already aware since years before the CD32. Akiko was the "so smart" solution implemented by Commodore engineers that evidently were desperately trying to give something to the developers to help them.

But it was too late...

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
kolla 
Re: Packed Versus Planar: FIGHT
Posted on 8-Nov-2022 6:25:45
#692 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 20-Aug-2003
Posts: 2377
From: Trondheim, Norway

According to math, wormholes are real.

Last edited by kolla on 08-Nov-2022 at 06:27 AM.

_________________
B5D6A1D019D5D45BCC56F4782AC220D8B3E2A6CC

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Wol 
Re: Packed Versus Planar: FIGHT
Posted on 8-Nov-2022 8:04:54
#693 ]
Cult Member
Joined: 8-Mar-2003
Posts: 986
From: UK.......Sol 3.

@kolla

True ! Iv'e got lot's of wormholes in my garden, Cat poo too...

Wol.

_________________
It is my conviction that killing under the cloak of war is nothing but an act of murder.~Albert Einstein

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Karlos 
Re: Packed Versus Planar: FIGHT
Posted on 8-Nov-2022 10:38:16
#694 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 24-Aug-2003
Posts: 3372
From: As-sassin-aaate! As-sassin-aaate! Ooh! We forgot the ammunition!

@kolla

Pure mathematics has predicted many things there was no prior conception of in physics that have been experimentally observed since, from antimatter to black holes. Though if you want to get technical, no black hole has been observed, just the assumed event horizon and accretion disks of candidate supermassive black holes.

The weirdest thing IMO are imaginary numbers. Numbers conceived to allow for roots of negative numbers. Something entirely abstract, at "right angles to everyday reality" that have no readily graspable everyday intuition. You can't have an imaginary quantity of something. Combined with real numbers into "complex" numbers they are even more divorced from every day reality. You can't even arrange them by size because the complex plane is not an ordered field. And yet, complex numbers are quintessential in our most fundamental understanding of reality itself, at the smallest scale. QM wavefunctions are defined in terms of complex numbers.

_________________
Doing stupid things for fun...

 Status: Online!
Profile     Report this post  
cdimauro 
Re: Packed Versus Planar: FIGHT
Posted on 8-Nov-2022 20:13:51
#695 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 29-Oct-2012
Posts: 3097
From: Germany

@kolla

Quote:

kolla wrote:
According to math, wormholes are real.

It was according to physicists that wormholes could be a possibility (read: it was never proved), not to maths (which was only a tool used to arrive to this possibility).

Anyway, your example doesn't apply: packed graphics is real, it was/is implemented and it's what most likely you're using.

Yes, it was/is implemented only as powers of two, but there's not much difference when going with non-powers of two, as already explained and proved on my article.

Last but not really least, the challenge with planar graphics was about the efficiency. Here maths, as a tool, clearly helps to prove which format is the most efficient, as shown on my article.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Hammer 
Re: Packed Versus Planar: FIGHT
Posted on 9-Nov-2022 2:12:00
#696 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 9-Mar-2003
Posts: 4611
From: Australia

@cdimauro

Quote:

Not needed: it was already proven by Maths.

That's not a practical demonstration.


Quote:
It was already aware since years before the CD32. Akiko was the "so smart" solution implemented by Commodore engineers that evidently were desperately trying to give something to the developers to help them.

But it was too late...

To be specific

From https://bigbookofamigahardware.com/bboah/product.aspx?id=1604

The “chunky to planar” logic was thought out in a lunchtime conversation between Beth Richard (system chip design), Chris Coley (board design), and Ken Dyke (software) over Subway sandwiches on a picnic table in a nearby park one day, because Ken was telling us how much of a pain it was to shuffle bits in software to port games from other platforms to the Amiga planar system. We took the idea to Hedley Davis, who was the system chip team manager and lead engineer on Akiko and he said we could go ahead with it. I showed him the “napkin sketch” of how I thought the logic would work and was planning on getting to it the next day as it was already late afternoon by that point. I came in the next morning and Hedley had completed it already, just from the sketch!


Hedley Davis engineered Akiko.

https://www.landley.net/history/mirror/commodore/haynie.html
Question: What was the earilest point you realised that games were going to go heavily into 3D and that the Amiga's chipset was not going to be right for it (basicly when did you want to start work on a chipset geared up for 3D work?)?

Dave Haynie:

I think the point at which we knew 3D would be important was probably a year or two before the CD32 shipped.

Ed Hepler left the AAA group and went on to start the Hombre project.



--------
Commodore was aware of the "3D" gaming evolution from around 1991 to 1992.

Without math compute performance increase, AAA's display capabilities are only part of the solution.

Meanwhile at Sony
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation#Origins
Negotiations officially ended in May 1992 and in order to decide the fate of the PlayStation project, a meeting was held in June 1992, consisting of Sony President Ohga, PlayStation Head Kutaragi and several senior members of Sony's board. At the meeting, Kutaragi unveiled a proprietary CD-ROM-based system he had been working on which involved playing video games with 3D graphics to the board


Playstation's work-in-progress 3D game console was revealed during Sony's June 1992 meeting.

Playstation has a MIPS R3000 RISC CPU @ 33 Mhz (33 MIPS) and a 66 MIPS co-processor. Playstation's 3D operates via integer datatype.

----
Meanwhile on the desktop PC clone market...

Under Advanced Computing Environment (ACE) consortium, PC cloners who when against IBM e Micro Channel Architecture have effectively declared the MIPS CPU architecture as the replacement for the Intel X86, but Intel released Pentium Pro (CISC-RISC hybrid) wreaked the ACE party.

Advanced Computing Environment (ACE) consortium's 1991 founders include Compaq, Microsoft, MIPS Computer Systems, Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC), and the Santa Cruz Operation (SCO).

One reported motivation for Compaq's involvement in ACE was to "light a fire under Intel" and get the company to produce a roadmap that was competitive enough for Compaq's customers. Intel's response was to accelerate the delivery of the Pentium and to pursue parallel development of three generations of future products (P5, P6 and P7), thus providing a roadmap that could dissuade its customers from adopting RISC architectures.

Work on PCI began at the Intel Architecture Labs (IAL, also Architecture Development Lab) in 1990. A team of primarily IAL engineers defined the architecture and developed a proof of concept chipset and platform (Saturn) partnering with teams in the company's desktop PC systems and core logic product organizations. The first PCI chipset was released in November 1992 as Intel's "Saturn" 420TX.

Last edited by Hammer on 09-Nov-2022 at 02:48 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 09-Nov-2022 at 02:45 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 09-Nov-2022 at 02:24 AM.

_________________
Ryzen 9 7900X, DDR5-6000 32 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti
Amiga 1200 (rev 1D1, KS 3.2, TF1260, 68060 @ 63 Mhz, 128 MB)
Amiga 500 (rev 6A, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi3a/Emu68)

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
cdimauro 
Re: Packed Versus Planar: FIGHT
Posted on 9-Nov-2022 5:40:58
#697 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 29-Oct-2012
Posts: 3097
From: Germany

@Hammer

Quote:

Hammer wrote:
@cdimauro

Quote:

Not needed: it was already proven by Maths.

That's not a practical demonstration.

How do you prove that a singularity exists on black holes? Do you plan to travel back and forth from its center?

Jokes aside, if you prove something with maths a practical demonstration is redundant: you've already proved it. Nothing else is needed.

Specifically and as I've already written replying to kolla, the topic was about the efficiency of planar and packed graphics formats, and here you need numbers (which I gave) to prove it.
Quote:
Quote:
It was already aware since years before the CD32. Akiko was the "so smart" solution implemented by Commodore engineers that evidently were desperately trying to give something to the developers to help them.

But it was too late...

To be specific

From https://bigbookofamigahardware.com/bboah/product.aspx?id=1604

The “chunky to planar” logic was thought out in a lunchtime conversation between Beth Richard (system chip design), Chris Coley (board design), and Ken Dyke (software) over Subway sandwiches on a picnic table in a nearby park one day, because Ken was telling us how much of a pain it was to shuffle bits in software to port games from other platforms to the Amiga planar system. We took the idea to Hedley Davis, who was the system chip team manager and lead engineer on Akiko and he said we could go ahead with it. I showed him the “napkin sketch” of how I thought the logic would work and was planning on getting to it the next day as it was already late afternoon by that point. I came in the next morning and Hedley had completed it already, just from the sketch!


Hedley Davis engineered Akiko.

Interesting. So, it was the fruit of a lunch conversation and done in one day.

At least this dumb solution didn't required a great effort...
Quote:
https://www.landley.net/history/mirror/commodore/haynie.html
Question: What was the earilest point you realised that games were going to go heavily into 3D and that the Amiga's chipset was not going to be right for it (basicly when did you want to start work on a chipset geared up for 3D work?)?

Dave Haynie:

I think the point at which we knew 3D would be important was probably a year or two before the CD32 shipped.

Ed Hepler left the AAA group and went on to start the Hombre project.



--------
Commodore was aware of the "3D" gaming evolution from around 1991 to 1992.

Without math compute performance increase, AAA's display capabilities are only part of the solution.

IMO Wing Commander was the game changer.

Anyway, what you reported shows that Commodore had plenty of time to integrate a chunky pixel mode on AGA.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
bhabbott 
Re: Packed Versus Planar: FIGHT
Posted on 9-Nov-2022 7:12:49
#698 ]
Regular Member
Joined: 6-Jun-2018
Posts: 246
From: Aotearoa

@cdimauro

Quote:

cdimauro wrote:

There are several primitives that were deeply analyzed on my article, but let's focus on the conclusion about the most important one for an Amiga: cookie-cut. Here is it:

Packed: it ranges from a minimum of 4 (memory; ndr) accesses to a maximum of 8.
Planar: This ranges from a minimum of 12 accesses (memory; ndr) to a maximum of 24.
Conclusions: As we can see, for this last analyzed primitive the planar format is even more penalized than the packed one, because the more the bitplanes increase the more the accesses to read always the same mask: an enormous waste considering that the mask is always the same.


As you can see I've also used the same word: enormous.

I'm skeptical though. You say that with planar there is a minimum of 12 '(memory; ndr) accesses' (whatever that means), but with packed the minimum is 4. However 1 bitplane is the same for packed and planar - they are identical - so how can there be a difference in the number of 'accesses'?

I have more enjoyable things to do then checking your math. Provide some code we can run to quantify the 'ENORMOUS waste of bandwidth', or I will remain skeptical.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
pixie 
Re: Packed Versus Planar: FIGHT
Posted on 9-Nov-2022 7:38:10
#699 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 10-Mar-2003
Posts: 2801
From: Figueira da Foz - Portugal

@Hammer

Quote:
Ed Hepler left the AAA group and went on to start the Hombre project.

How I would love to see a WhatIf™ FPGA machine that would allow to bring back these projects back to life, such as AA3000+ AGA DSP, and flexible enough we could run multiple such machines on it.

Last edited by pixie on 09-Nov-2022 at 08:02 AM.

_________________
Indigo 3D Lounge, my second home.
The Illusion of Choice | Am*ga

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Karlos 
Re: Packed Versus Planar: FIGHT
Posted on 9-Nov-2022 12:26:20
#700 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 24-Aug-2003
Posts: 3372
From: As-sassin-aaate! As-sassin-aaate! Ooh! We forgot the ammunition!

@pixie

To some extent isn't that what the Apollo / SAGA is all about?

_________________
Doing stupid things for fun...

 Status: Online!
Profile     Report this post  
Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 Next Page )

[ home ][ about us ][ privacy ] [ forums ][ classifieds ] [ links ][ news archive ] [ link to us ][ user account ]
Copyright (C) 2000 - 2019 Amigaworld.net.
Amigaworld.net was originally founded by David Doyle