Comments on: Massive amounts of 3D particles without Alchemy and PixelBender http://blog.joa-ebert.com/2009/04/03/massive-amounts-of-3d-particles-without-alchemy-and-pixelbender/ Actionscript3, Flash, Java, C#, C++, Algorithms & Imageprocessing Wed, 10 Mar 2010 16:22:51 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Cardin http://blog.joa-ebert.com/2009/04/03/massive-amounts-of-3d-particles-without-alchemy-and-pixelbender/comment-page-1/#comment-184602 Cardin Sun, 31 Jan 2010 13:34:23 +0000 http://blog.joa-ebert.com/?p=300#comment-184602 13/32 on your version, very smooth I like it. 10/60 on Ralph's. A bit of a lag. Nearly froze my Firefox - everything but that tab was not working. Thankfully I had Fire Gestures to close the tab, phew! This is a real bummer for Pixel Bender, I'd really thought we could play with shaders in Flash. =( 13/32 on your version, very smooth I like it.

10/60 on Ralph’s. A bit of a lag. Nearly froze my Firefox – everything but that tab was not working. Thankfully I had Fire Gestures to close the tab, phew!

This is a real bummer for Pixel Bender, I’d really thought we could play with shaders in Flash. =(

]]> By: Daniel Barber http://blog.joa-ebert.com/2009/04/03/massive-amounts-of-3d-particles-without-alchemy-and-pixelbender/comment-page-1/#comment-175835 Daniel Barber Fri, 18 Sep 2009 05:34:50 +0000 http://blog.joa-ebert.com/?p=300#comment-175835 Sorry that should have been "0x000000" not "0xFFFFFF". Sorry that should have been “0×000000″ not “0xFFFFFF”.

]]> By: Daniel Barber http://blog.joa-ebert.com/2009/04/03/massive-amounts-of-3d-particles-without-alchemy-and-pixelbender/comment-page-1/#comment-175834 Daniel Barber Fri, 18 Sep 2009 05:32:36 +0000 http://blog.joa-ebert.com/?p=300#comment-175834 I found that using two vectors shaves off a few milliseconds: private const _empty: Vector. = new Vector.( 550 * 400, true ); I fill this with the 0xFFFFFF when the class is instantiated. Then in the enter frame method I clone the vector: var buffer: Vector. = _empty.slice(); I've left it running for some time, and don't seem to see any issue with GC. I found that using two vectors shaves off a few milliseconds:

private const _empty: Vector. = new Vector.( 550 * 400, true );

I fill this with the 0xFFFFFF when the class is instantiated. Then in the enter frame method I clone the vector:

var buffer: Vector. = _empty.slice();

I’ve left it running for some time, and don’t seem to see any issue with GC.

]]> By: Notes: Loop Optimizations 2 | Course Vector http://blog.joa-ebert.com/2009/04/03/massive-amounts-of-3d-particles-without-alchemy-and-pixelbender/comment-page-1/#comment-175435 Notes: Loop Optimizations 2 | Course Vector Tue, 08 Sep 2009 16:23:43 +0000 http://blog.joa-ebert.com/?p=300#comment-175435 [...] of a difference in speed. The discovery I made after looking into BetweenAS3 and the efforts of Joa Ebert on his AS3 particles I noticed they were using LinkedLists to manage large numbers of objects. [...] [...] of a difference in speed. The discovery I made after looking into BetweenAS3 and the efforts of Joa Ebert on his AS3 particles I noticed they were using LinkedLists to manage large numbers of objects. [...]

]]> By: Patrick http://blog.joa-ebert.com/2009/04/03/massive-amounts-of-3d-particles-without-alchemy-and-pixelbender/comment-page-1/#comment-175425 Patrick Tue, 08 Sep 2009 08:08:29 +0000 http://blog.joa-ebert.com/?p=300#comment-175425 That's what I thought too. And to my surprise, the framerate really is about 2-3fps higher and stays very stable. The GC doesn't have that much to do in the rest of my stuff so maybe that's why it's okay? That’s what I thought too. And to my surprise, the framerate really is about 2-3fps higher and stays very stable. The GC doesn’t have that much to do in the rest of my stuff so maybe that’s why it’s okay?

]]> By: joa http://blog.joa-ebert.com/2009/04/03/massive-amounts-of-3d-particles-without-alchemy-and-pixelbender/comment-page-1/#comment-175380 joa Mon, 07 Sep 2009 08:37:02 +0000 http://blog.joa-ebert.com/?p=300#comment-175380 Patrick: You will create a new Vector each frame in that case with the size of the BitmapData. This means every so-often the GC will kick in and has to clean up a lot ... Patrick: You will create a new Vector each frame in that case with the size of the BitmapData. This means every so-often the GC will kick in and has to clean up a lot …

]]> By: Patrick http://blog.joa-ebert.com/2009/04/03/massive-amounts-of-3d-particles-without-alchemy-and-pixelbender/comment-page-1/#comment-175349 Patrick Sun, 06 Sep 2009 10:24:08 +0000 http://blog.joa-ebert.com/?p=300#comment-175349 If you replace while( --n > -1 ) buffer[ n ] = 0x000000; with a simple BitmapData.fillRect and another BitmapData.getVector() it's actually faster. What's even better is that performance won't depend that much on the size of the BitmapData anymore but (almost) only on the number of particles. If you replace

while( –n > -1 ) buffer[ n ] = 0×000000;

with a simple BitmapData.fillRect and another BitmapData.getVector() it’s actually faster. What’s even better is that performance won’t depend that much on the size of the BitmapData anymore but (almost) only on the number of particles.

]]> By: Alchemy for ActionScript at blog.joa-ebert.com - Blog of Joa Ebert http://blog.joa-ebert.com/2009/04/03/massive-amounts-of-3d-particles-without-alchemy-and-pixelbender/comment-page-1/#comment-173805 Alchemy for ActionScript at blog.joa-ebert.com - Blog of Joa Ebert Tue, 04 Aug 2009 22:34:30 +0000 http://blog.joa-ebert.com/?p=300#comment-173805 [...] the inverse square root might be inlined and optimized much better. I did a simple test using the Lorenz attractor from before and replacing the Vector.<uint> buffer with a ByteArray gave a performance boost [...] [...] the inverse square root might be inlined and optimized much better. I did a simple test using the Lorenz attractor from before and replacing the Vector.<uint> buffer with a ByteArray gave a performance boost [...]

]]> By: Nightrider http://blog.joa-ebert.com/2009/04/03/massive-amounts-of-3d-particles-without-alchemy-and-pixelbender/comment-page-1/#comment-172464 Nightrider Wed, 08 Jul 2009 09:52:22 +0000 http://blog.joa-ebert.com/?p=300#comment-172464 I tested both movies in an old pc. The AS3 version was much faster, around 17fps while Ralph's one was struggling to reach 9fps. PC specs: AMD Athlon 64 2400MHz, 1536 MB (DDR SDRAM) I tested both movies in an old pc. The AS3 version was much faster, around 17fps while Ralph’s one was struggling to reach 9fps. PC specs: AMD Athlon 64 2400MHz, 1536 MB (DDR SDRAM)

]]> By: Miream Explained | Andy Li's Blog http://blog.joa-ebert.com/2009/04/03/massive-amounts-of-3d-particles-without-alchemy-and-pixelbender/comment-page-1/#comment-172298 Miream Explained | Andy Li's Blog Sun, 05 Jul 2009 03:21:52 +0000 http://blog.joa-ebert.com/?p=300#comment-172298 [...] you may noticed that the program is very similar to the Alchemy particle pusher. In fact, I used Joa Eberts AS3 only version as a base and altered it as I need to overcome the limit of [...] [...] you may noticed that the program is very similar to the Alchemy particle pusher. In fact, I used Joa Eberts AS3 only version as a base and altered it as I need to overcome the limit of [...]

]]> By: nathan http://blog.joa-ebert.com/2009/04/03/massive-amounts-of-3d-particles-without-alchemy-and-pixelbender/comment-page-1/#comment-171537 nathan Mon, 22 Jun 2009 20:34:04 +0000 http://blog.joa-ebert.com/?p=300#comment-171537 here it is in haxe for those interested :) http://webr3.org/blog/haxe/flash-10-massive-amounts-of-3d-particles-with-haxe/ here it is in haxe for those interested :)

http://webr3.org/blog/haxe/flash-10-massive-amounts-of-3d-particles-with-haxe/

]]> By: Leaving The Sandbox at blog.joa-ebert.com - Blog of Joa Ebert http://blog.joa-ebert.com/2009/04/03/massive-amounts-of-3d-particles-without-alchemy-and-pixelbender/comment-page-1/#comment-171317 Leaving The Sandbox at blog.joa-ebert.com - Blog of Joa Ebert Fri, 19 Jun 2009 15:51:32 +0000 http://blog.joa-ebert.com/?p=300#comment-171317 [...] but I have not implemented all instructions of the AVM+ yet. Although I can already transform the 3D lorenz attractor to TAAS for instance and all types are solved [...] [...] but I have not implemented all instructions of the AVM+ yet. Although I can already transform the 3D lorenz attractor to TAAS for instance and all types are solved [...]

]]> By: Boostez vos performances en utilisant des LinkedList « Minuit4 http://blog.joa-ebert.com/2009/04/03/massive-amounts-of-3d-particles-without-alchemy-and-pixelbender/comment-page-1/#comment-170355 Boostez vos performances en utilisant des LinkedList « Minuit4 Sat, 30 May 2009 17:16:19 +0000 http://blog.joa-ebert.com/?p=300#comment-170355 [...] Joa Ebert en parle aussi ici avec un superbe exemple. Il disait qu’il s’en servait aussi dans son moteur de tween qui était, grâce à tout ça, plus performant que les Tweenlite ou Tweener. [...] [...] Joa Ebert en parle aussi ici avec un superbe exemple. Il disait qu’il s’en servait aussi dans son moteur de tween qui était, grâce à tout ça, plus performant que les Tweenlite ou Tweener. [...]

]]> By: Hudson Ansley http://blog.joa-ebert.com/2009/04/03/massive-amounts-of-3d-particles-without-alchemy-and-pixelbender/comment-page-1/#comment-170190 Hudson Ansley Wed, 27 May 2009 22:18:24 +0000 http://blog.joa-ebert.com/?p=300#comment-170190 This was a fascinating read, thanks! I thought this might make a good example of how much faster linked lists are than Arrays, but I did a version that uses an array instead of the list and it was only about 1 fps slower (31 instead of 32 fps on my machine) and I'm not even typing the Array values... Does that sound odd to you? I know haXe has a fastList which uses a linked list structure because it is supposed to be much faster... kind of puts a crimp in a talk I was going to give on optimization... :-/ I'd like to hear any insights you might have about this. This was a fascinating read, thanks!
I thought this might make a good example of how much faster linked lists are than Arrays, but I did a version that uses an array instead of the list and it was only about 1 fps slower (31 instead of 32 fps on my machine) and I’m not even typing the Array values…
Does that sound odd to you? I know haXe has a fastList which uses a linked list structure because it is supposed to be much faster… kind of puts a crimp in a talk I was going to give on optimization… :-/
I’d like to hear any insights you might have about this.

]]> By: Mark Bradley http://blog.joa-ebert.com/2009/04/03/massive-amounts-of-3d-particles-without-alchemy-and-pixelbender/comment-page-1/#comment-168910 Mark Bradley Fri, 08 May 2009 06:57:07 +0000 http://blog.joa-ebert.com/?p=300#comment-168910 Very nice! Pure AS3 is running faster for me. The Alchemy version crashed FireFox the first time it loaded. Very nice!

Pure AS3 is running faster for me. The Alchemy version crashed FireFox the first time it loaded.

]]> By: More play with Alchemy : Lookup table effects. - unitzeroone(beta) http://blog.joa-ebert.com/2009/04/03/massive-amounts-of-3d-particles-without-alchemy-and-pixelbender/comment-page-1/#comment-168844 More play with Alchemy : Lookup table effects. - unitzeroone(beta) Thu, 07 May 2009 15:27:12 +0000 http://blog.joa-ebert.com/?p=300#comment-168844 [...] Joa Ebert - Massive amounts of 3D particles without Alchemy and Pixelbender [...] [...] Joa Ebert – Massive amounts of 3D particles without Alchemy and Pixelbender [...]

]]>