Would you like to have GPU accelerated compiling tools? - Developers

[QUOTE=Tobba;23574763]Some parts will be faster Like VRAD probbably would run alot faster on the GPU[/QUOTE] Everything would, as everything is composed by small tasks repeated a lot of times.

I have 4 Core, and sadly i'm a sorry idiot at optimizing maps so i would benefit from having GPU Acceleration.

[url]http://rvanhoorn.ruhosting.nl/optimization.php?chapter=intro[/url]

I've read that an ungodly amount of time since ... That ... Abomination I made. Edit: I should host that on my website :P.

[QUOTE=TerabyteS;23574701]What the hell are you talking about. Why would it?[/QUOTE] Because, as the graphics is more powerful, the end result is poorly optimised maps, with the creators will then blame other people for their laggy piece of shit.

Not a single transistor wasted plox. :v:

[QUOTE=IronPhoenix;23583089]Because, as the graphics is more powerful, the end result is poorly optimised maps, with the creators will then blame other people for their laggy piece of shit.[/QUOTE] That's not the tools' fault. You should blame with the author about his map being shit, not the tools he used.

[QUOTE=TerabyteS;23585012]That's not the tools' fault. You should blame with the author about his map being shit, not the tools he used.[/QUOTE] But the tool is being made with the sole purpose to speed up compile times, and issue which is not a problem in properly optimised maps.

[QUOTE=TerabyteS;23563651]My friend could be able to edit the source codes of vvis, vrad and vbsp to make them use the graphics card to compile. Would you be interested in this project? Vote in the poll.[/QUOTE] I'd give them a try, maps compile pretty fast on my machine already though.

It's so annoying when new mappers tell me how shitty Hammer is and blame their computer for not being able to compile anything, then no matter how many times I tell them it's based on the optimization, they do not understand it still. Even my cheap laptop from 2006 can compile fine, and it runs EP2 at around 10 fps on a near empty map, no way it could run the default EP2 maps. But it compiles fine.

[QUOTE=IronPhoenix;23570700]Again, i have 4 cores, and my gfx card is only an 8800gt. I would have no use for something like this. But then, who doesn't have 4 cores now, they are so damn cheap.[/QUOTE] Cheap is still expensive when you have NO MONEY, and no job openings within a 50 mile radius. I've had 1 core, 1gb a RAM, and a ATI HD 2600 Pro 512mb, for as long as I can remember.

[QUOTE=Rastadogg5;23586938]Cheap is still expensive when you have NO MONEY, and no job openings within a 50 mile radius. I've had 1 core, 1gb a RAM, and a ATI HD 2600 Pro 512mb, for as long as I can remember.[/QUOTE] I have a colleague who travels 60 miles to get to work each day. If you really wanted a job, you would go for one.

[QUOTE=IronPhoenix;23586960]I have a colleague who travels 60 miles to get to work each day. If you really wanted a job, you would go for one.[/QUOTE] I also don't have a car. So that is not an option as of yet. When I do have a vehicle, then I will look for jobs farther away from home.

[QUOTE=metallics;23566566]Get a multicore pc, use the -threads compile parameter, set the number of threads to # of cores - 1, voilà, you can do other stuff while you compile.[/QUOTE] I have a multicore PC, but I'd rather be running the compile processes off my completely idle GPU as opposed to just running them off a different thread. [QUOTE=IronPhoenix;23585039]But the tool is being made with the sole purpose to speed up compile times, and issue which is not a problem in properly optimised maps.[/QUOTE] Because big maps don't have a lot of lightmap calculations :downs: If you've got a problem with VVIS running slow then sure, you probably forgot to func_detail that carved sphere and your map is badly optimised. But if you've just got a large map with some fairly dense lightmaps then your compile is going to take time regardless of how well you optimise your map and the only way to shorten that VRAD compile time is to either devote more resources to compiling it or make the lightmaps less dense and turn down the number of bounces. Only one of those options retains the original map quality, can you guess which one?

[QUOTE=Rastadogg5;23587021]I also don't have a car. So that is not an option as of yet. When I do have a vehicle, then I will look for jobs farther away from home.[/QUOTE] I travel 30 by train. I know people who would take a train a lot further than that. It can be done if you actually want to work.

[QUOTE=Rastadogg5;23587021]I also don't have a car. So that is not an option as of yet. When I do have a vehicle, then I will look for jobs farther away from home.[/QUOTE] Ever heard about public traffic like... bus, mate?

[QUOTE=IronPhoenix;23585039]But the tool is being made with the sole purpose to speed up compile times, and issue which is not a problem in properly optimised maps.[/QUOTE] I think i want to stab you, why would someone not want the ability to improve something? What the fuck is wrong with people, people with shitty maps will compile them regardless of how long it takes, this just helps the people who actually make good maps that may be optimized as well as they can, but still take a long time to compile? Or is that too much to take in. [editline]04:55PM[/editline] [QUOTE=killer89;23591141]Ever heard about public traffic like... bus, mate?[/QUOTE] Not all countries have as good mass transit as the european countries.

[QUOTE=Profanwolf;23592541]Not all countries have as good mass transit as the european countries.[/QUOTE] Britain for example :v: More buses would be nice, but then they would be shit buses. Also a GPU accelerated compiler would be cool to have, I have no use personally as nothing I make is that big or unoptimized. But for those who do optimize you get rewarded with near instant compiles, and those who don't, well, you get a quick compile for your shit map.

[QUOTE=hexpunK;23592768]Britain for example :v: More buses would be nice, but then they would be shit buses. [/QUOTE] I take two trains from surrey to west sussex each day. They are anything but shit. The big cities have well established travel networks, and you have out to the country for the bus services to be once a week.

No its so annoying how mappers complain about hammer cause it can't compile in real time so it costs modding teams time, And then we turn around and find an awnser to help speed up any compile time and "NO!" You suddenly don't need it. Bloody ell make up you're mind.

[QUOTE=IronPhoenix;23585039]But the tool is being made with the sole purpose to speed up compile times, and issue which is not a problem in properly optimised maps.[/QUOTE] Large maps. Most of my focus of mapping is on very large maps. I'm very picky about optimization. My current project takes a total of 20 minutes to compile with HDR, with no -final or -staticproplighting parameters. This makes it a real pain to test the effects of lighting over the large scale of the map (situations in which cordon bounds would be useless) and I shudder to think how long it will take with the -final and -staticproplighting parameters. GPU acceleration would be insanely useful if it could cut this time down a large chunk. There's no real reason not to try this if it can be done.

[QUOTE=Profanwolf;23592541] Not all countries have as good mass transit as the european countries.[/QUOTE] The truth. In the US, if you don't have a car you're not making it far. And you would have to be in the city for buses/trains, otherwise you will never see a single one. A taxi if you are lucky. Long travel is done via airports or interstates only.

[QUOTE=glitchvid;23593468]No its so annoying how mappers complain about hammer cause it can't compile in real time so it costs modding teams time, And then we turn around and find an awnser to help speed up any compile time and "NO!" You suddenly don't need it. Bloody ell make up you're mind.[/QUOTE] Actually, the same people who want this are the same people who complain endlessly about hammer not having large enough limits etc etc.

[QUOTE=killer89;23591141]Ever heard about public traffic like... bus, mate?[/QUOTE] I live in what might as well be the desert, no buses, trains, taxis, or anything. For now I'm shit out of luck.

[QUOTE=IronPhoenix;23592842]I take two trains from surrey to west sussex each day. They are anything but shit. The big cities have well established travel networks, and you have out to the country for the bus services to be once a week.[/QUOTE] West Sussex five :buddy:

Why did this turn in a talk about people' ways to earn money?

[QUOTE=TerabyteS;23601195]Why did this turn in a talk about people' ways to earn money?[/QUOTE] We got bored, and the conversation got awesome

[QUOTE=IronPhoenix;23585039]But the tool is being made with the sole purpose to speed up compile times, and issue which is not a problem in properly optimised maps.[/QUOTE] Unless you're someone like me who makes insanely complex geometry in some maps which, even when optimised to the full extent results in ridiculously long compile times. I'd absolutely love to have anything that would speed compile times up significantly.

Go fill a large box with simple box shaped skyscrapers, of varying heights. Come back to me and tell me that you get a low compile time. Just making everything a func_detail won't solve that problem. [editline]09:46AM[/editline] So don't tell me that my map's poorly optimised because full VVIS takes 37 minutes, there's a limit to func_detail.

[QUOTE=Wolfie13;23610575]Go fill a large box with simple box shaped skyscrapers, of varying heights. Come back to me and tell me that you get a low compile time. Just making everything a func_detail won't solve that problem. [editline]09:46AM[/editline] So don't tell me that my map's poorly optimised because full VVIS takes 37 minutes, there's a limit to func_detail.[/QUOTE] If they would be aligned, that would help the compile times