Voit lisätä twiitteihisi sijainnin, esimerkiksi kaupungin tai tarkemman paikan, verkosta ja kolmannen osapuolen sovellusten kautta. Halutessasi voit poistaa twiittisi sijaintihistorian myöhemmin. Lue lisää
The trick is that you still have to use the same values, or else it will optimize out too much and give incorrect deltas. It can be useful to think of your shader like a node tree of calculations (think UE4 material editor.
Then you prune a branch and replace wth a reasonable constant. Then you know the cost of that branch. It’s messy, inexact, and you have to write your shader a certain way, but it’s one method I’ve used in the past with reasonable results.
This likely won’t give you a good view since SGPRs and VGPRs (+ LDS with compute) affect occupancy. Ex, at the low occupancy end, moving from 129 to 128 VGPRs can nearly double the performance (halve the time) of a program’s execution.
Absolutely. I've actually seen that sort of thing myself before. That's why I put in the bit at the end for it being messy and inexact. But at least it still gives you empirical evidence. By taking out that branch, you did gain a lot, but it's possibly not why you think.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.
