The genie effect is a mesh warp, which I think is a set of affine transforms. Affine transforms can benefit from vectorization, so I'd guess Apple optimized them for AltiVec.
Is it? I'm not so sure. It's an operation on a pixel map not on vector graphics. I bet I could do it faster by doing some simple operations on the pixels and not bother with afine xforms.
I just got a G4 400 used and I can tell you its loads faster than my nieces 400 mhz iMac. Web pages load faster, the internet in general is faster, and I'm only using Classic on the original OSX. I gotta get OSX 10.1. I also need to read ads better............................................ ....
is altivec not a vector processing unit? <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes it is, but the same word is being used for two different concepts. Vector graphics are resolution independent commands to construct an image based on mathematics, not pixel maps. Vector processing refers simply to a calculation unit that operates on n-tuples (16, 8 and 4 in the case of Altivec).
My understanding is that Altivec allows one to do the same process in parallel, doing the same thing up to 16 times at once. That way, if you are doing the same thing to every pixel, you can do it to 16 pixels at once. If the process is dependent on knowing the result of a previous calculation, it can't be altiveced.
<strong>My understanding is that Altivec allows one to do the same process in parallel, doing the same thing up to 16 times at once. That way, if you are doing the same thing to every pixel, you can do it to 16 pixels at once. If the process is dependent on knowing the result of a previous calculation, it can't be altiveced.
Is that anywhere's near mark?</strong><hr></blockquote>
It's in the ballpark. AltiVec can only(!) operate on 4 pixels at a time, though, because a pixel is 32 bits, and 32 x 4 = 128.
Comments
most the differences noticed likely due to the basic fact that most G4 systems are just overall better system wide
however, there are some things that clearly just work better on the G4
<strong>Is it? I'm not so sure. It's an operation on a pixel map not on vector graphics</strong><hr></blockquote>
Using tht logic, how on Earth can Photoshop be AltiVec enhanced?
<strong>
Using tht logic, how on Earth can Photoshop be AltiVec enhanced?</strong><hr></blockquote>
You don't understand what I'm talking about.
[ 03-01-2002: Message edited by: wmf ]</p>
<strong>Vectorization has nothing to do with vector graphics. Vectorization means converting the code so that it can take advantage of AltiVec.
[ 03-01-2002: Message edited by: wmf ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
is altivec not a vector processing unit? <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
<strong>
is altivec not a vector processing unit? <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes it is, but the same word is being used for two different concepts. Vector graphics are resolution independent commands to construct an image based on mathematics, not pixel maps. Vector processing refers simply to a calculation unit that operates on n-tuples (16, 8 and 4 in the case of Altivec).
Is that anywhere's near mark?
<strong>My understanding is that Altivec allows one to do the same process in parallel, doing the same thing up to 16 times at once. That way, if you are doing the same thing to every pixel, you can do it to 16 pixels at once. If the process is dependent on knowing the result of a previous calculation, it can't be altiveced.
Is that anywhere's near mark?</strong><hr></blockquote>
It's in the ballpark. AltiVec can only(!) operate on 4 pixels at a time, though, because a pixel is 32 bits, and 32 x 4 = 128.
<strong>
AltiVec can only(!) operate on 4 pixels at a time, though, because a pixel is 32 bits, and 32 x 4 = 128.</strong><hr></blockquote>
It can also operate on 1555 data don't forget...