 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Where in the name of God can you get 12 Mbit/sec? I thought 8 was the
> maximum that ADSL supports...
Had 16 at home for the last 18 months...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
>> Where in the name of God can you get 12 Mbit/sec? I thought 8 was the
>> maximum that ADSL supports...
>
> Had 16 at home for the last 18 months...
Interesting. Most of the people I know have 2 Mbit/sec or less.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> More realistic physics and AI!
>
> If you tune down the physics and AI because the CPU is not fast enough
> to calculate them, you will be drastically changing gameplay. It would not
> be just a cosmetic change. I have never heard of any game doing that
Sure, but don't you think the minimum system requirements for CPUs in games
will continue to increase? Game developers are not going to be satisfied to
just stick with what they have at the moment.
> Thus after a certain point, when your current CPU can calculate the
> physics and AI just fine, adding more cores won't change anything.
I can't even begin to imagine any point where a CPU will be able to
calculate physics perfectly without cutting any corners. Every increase in
CPU speed will result in more realistic and believable physics with fewer
short-cuts. For starters you need non-ridid bodies for large objects,
realistically deformable terrain and better collisions. They all need more
CPU cycles.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Had 16 at home for the last 18 months...
>
> Interesting. Most of the people I know have 2 Mbit/sec or less.
They are all well below the average of 3.6 then:
http://www.ofcom.org.uk/media/features/brspeeds
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
>>> Had 16 at home for the last 18 months...
>>
>> Interesting. Most of the people I know have 2 Mbit/sec or less.
>
> They are all well below the average of 3.6 then:
>
> http://www.ofcom.org.uk/media/features/brspeeds
Note: "over 60% of UK consumers currently subscribe to packages
promising speeds of up to 8 Mbit/s."
So 12 Mbit/sec would be pretty damned fast by comparison.
Either way, it's unclear to me whether this page is talking about
*connection speed* or *actual traffic throughput*. Having a 2 Mbit
connectio doesn't actually mean you always receive data that fast...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott <sco### [at] scott com> wrote:
> > Thus after a certain point, when your current CPU can calculate the
> > physics and AI just fine, adding more cores won't change anything.
> I can't even begin to imagine any point where a CPU will be able to
> calculate physics perfectly without cutting any corners.
I'm talking about an actual modern game.
After it easily calculates everything it has to calculate per frame,
adding more cores is not going to speed it up at all.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp schrieb:
> AI and physics is not really something which you can tune up or down
> depending on your CPU speed.
Stopped reading right here.
I'm perfectly aware of that. But still, game developers will keep
developing games for high-end computers, and include increasingly
performance-hungry AI, physics etc.
It's not like the inability to easily tune it up or down would prohibit
from making it more complex.
And it's not like game developers weren't creative in finding ways of
scaling /some/ stuff to adjust to different computer performance levels.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp schrieb:
> Thus after a certain point, when your current CPU can calculate the
> physics and AI just fine, adding more cores won't change anything.
... until the next game is released.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> multitasking? Anyone?)
It's multitasking. It's just not the explorer multitasking.
> My PC at home is all SATA too. It still takes forever for TF2 to start
> up. :-P
How fast do they transfer? I get a smooth 80-100 MBps transfer rate.
> Where in the name of God can you get 12 Mbit/sec? I thought 8 was the
> maximum that ADSL supports...
Cable.
ADSL will easily go up to the gigabit range if the wire's short enough.
Anything over about 10 feet and you don't get those speeds, tho. :-)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Understanding the structure of the universe
via religion is like understanding the
structure of computers via Tron.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
> I'm no expert, but the length of the tracks from the farthest away bit
> of L1 cache to the CPU might be a problem.
That and the number of gates you have to go through to decode an address.
Every layer of transistors you have to go through to translate an address to
a cell is another gate time of delay.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Understanding the structure of the universe
via religion is like understanding the
structure of computers via Tron.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
