1

I've asked several questions regarding VBO previously here and from the comments i had received i decided that a new approach must be taken.

To put it simply - I'm trying to draw the Mandelbrot set which is defined on a large FLOAT array, around 512X512 Points. the purpose of my program is to let the user control the zooming and world's orientation (it's a 3d model). so far I've painted the entire thing using GL_TRIANGLE_STRIP which turned to be a bad choice because of its slow painting process. also because implementing my painting style (order of calling the glVertex) became impossible for coding for VBOs.

so I've got several questions.

even after this description i'm not sure either the VBO is the best choice because it's up the user to control the calculations.for each calculation that he causes by the program, i have to recompute the mandelbrot set(~60ms),and recopy the points to the buffer : a process which takes some time(?ms).

the program allows the user also to move in the world so no calculations are done here therefore VBO is an excellent choice here.

1.what's the best way to paint height map(when each cell in the array holds only the height)

2.how can i apply it on VBO and transfer it to cuda (cudaRegisterBuffer or something like that)

3.is there a way to distinguish between the mode and decide when VBOs are needed(in a no calculations mode) and when they aren't(calculations mode).

Darren Burgess
  • 4,200
  • 6
  • 27
  • 43
igal k
  • 1,883
  • 2
  • 28
  • 57
  • With `glBegin/glEnd` you are copying the whole data to the GPU each frame, too, but in this case with a heavy syscall for each individual vertex. So yes, a VBO is always the right way, even more so if the computation is done by CUDA, in which case there is absolutely no need for the VBO-data to be copied to the CPU ever. – Christian Rau Dec 17 '11 at 12:06

1 Answers1

1

You don't need to copy the CUDA data each frame if you bind the CUDA array/VBO to the DirectX/OpenGL VB (refer to the CUDA Programming Guide for details). One way to render data as a height-field is to use the Geometry Shader to emit the tris based on the height-field. Another way is to use the height field as a parallax-map (ref DirectX SDK). My personal fave would be to make your height-field an array of positions (X/Y/Z) and use CUDA to modify only the Y-Values, then use an index buffer to define the polygons that compose the surface. Note that you'll also need to update the vertex normals, and you may also want to use XYZ/UV if you want to texture the surface. If 512x512 is too big, use raster-ops (texture sampling) to populate a lower-resolution height-field of the region of interest. You can do this stage in CUDA or OpenGL/DirectX (I'd recommend doing it in CUDA where you can easily write your own sampling kernel to lookup pixels when down-sampling).

axon
  • 1,190
  • 6
  • 16