• Decent PC + Super low graphics = 100+ FPS?
    14 replies, posted
[video=youtube;I14HQ2LnoQI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I14HQ2LnoQI[/video]
For a long time, I've had an itch to try to hack Doom (the original one) to try to get it to as high a framerate as possible. Rewrite it in Vulkan, multithread it CPU-side, and then optimize until it's impossible to go any higher. Hardware-wise, a 1080Ti ought to be able to push that game to about a quarter million FPS, but I would expect some bottlenecks elsewhere, probably in driver code. I'd be interested in seeing just where that bottleneck lies. But I've never actually done it, because I've always got better things to work on. I have been meaning to learn Vulkan though, and I did just pick up a 1080Ti...
[QUOTE=gman003-main;52669032]For a long time, I've had an itch to try to hack Doom (the original one) to try to get it to as high a framerate as possible. Rewrite it in Vulkan, multithread it CPU-side, and then optimize until it's impossible to go any higher. Hardware-wise, a 1080Ti ought to be able to push that game to about a quarter million FPS, but I would expect some bottlenecks elsewhere, probably in driver code. I'd be interested in seeing just where that bottleneck lies. But I've never actually done it, because I've always got better things to work on. I have been meaning to learn Vulkan though, and I did just pick up a 1080Ti...[/QUOTE] You know, I have also been meaning to learn Vulkan and while I don't quite have a 1080ti, I'd be interesting in doing something like this as well (I have a 1070)
[QUOTE=gman003-main;52669032]For a long time, I've had an itch to try to hack Doom (the original one) to try to get it to as high a framerate as possible. Rewrite it in Vulkan, multithread it CPU-side, and then optimize until it's impossible to go any higher. Hardware-wise, a 1080Ti ought to be able to push that game to about a quarter million FPS, but I would expect some bottlenecks elsewhere, probably in driver code. I'd be interested in seeing just where that bottleneck lies. But I've never actually done it, because I've always got better things to work on. I have been meaning to learn Vulkan though, and I did just pick up a 1080Ti...[/QUOTE] also make with opencl and sli.
[QUOTE=Ithon;52669108]also make with opencl and sli.[/QUOTE] I had a related thought to try to rewrite Doom '93 to run entirely on GPU, save for things that literally can't, like I/O. But the CPU-side code would be just handing data to the GPU. Once a frame, it would poll input, and pass that to an OpenCL worker thread. It would pass any UDP packets into the GPU for processing. I'd even do config file processing at startup by passing a big string into a compute shader. And physics, AI, maybe even sound, would all be GPU. I don't think that's the performance-optimal way to do it, but it would be a good way to learn compute shaders, which I've also been meaning to do.
Bioshock Infinite looks like a ps2 level game with the muddy ass textures to match. "God thees looks BEAUTIFUL!" I mean, either my standards are too high or his are WAY too low. That's a crazy difference of perspective.
[QUOTE=Funktastic Dog;52669173]Bioshock Infinite looks like a ps2 level game with the muddy ass textures to match. "God thees looks BEAUTIFUL!" I mean, either my standards are too high or his are WAY too low. That's a crazy difference of perspective.[/QUOTE] think of it from the viewpoint of a guy that goes out of his way to get the lowest graphics possible out of a game, then his standards might be a bit clearer :v:
[video=youtube;VpU0Vnb18_0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VpU0Vnb18_0[/video] But he can certainly turn it down even more because his resolution still looks high.
[QUOTE=Funktastic Dog;52669173]Bioshock Infinite looks like a ps2 level game with the muddy ass textures to match. "God thees looks BEAUTIFUL!" I mean, either my standards are too high or his are WAY too low. That's a crazy difference of perspective.[/QUOTE] His channel focuses on running games on intel atoms, so yes his standards are "low" because thats you can get out of those machines
[QUOTE=da space core;52669342]His channel focuses on running games on intel atoms, so yes his standards are "low" because thats you can get out of those machines[/QUOTE] It's an interesting channel imo
Having just built my first ever rig, after a lifetime of sub-30FPS gaming, this is the most relatable video. Especially the part where he's having trouble controlling games due to being so smooth.
[QUOTE=gman003-main;52669124]I had a related thought to try to rewrite Doom '93 to run entirely on GPU, save for things that literally can't, like I/O. But the CPU-side code would be just handing data to the GPU. Once a frame, it would poll input, and pass that to an OpenCL worker thread. It would pass any UDP packets into the GPU for processing. I'd even do config file processing at startup by passing a big string into a compute shader. And physics, AI, maybe even sound, would all be GPU. I don't think that's the performance-optimal way to do it, but it would be a good way to learn compute shaders, which I've also been meaning to do.[/QUOTE] I'd go with the Chocolate Doom sourceport before the original release of the source code. Chocolate Doom compiles and runs on modern machines (obviously) yet maintained a beautiful, organized, and conservative source base.
He should've also turned the resolution down. It looked to me like he was running each game at 1080p, but he could've squeezed just a little more out of them with some delicious 800x600.
wait so he doesn't have an actual system to play games on?
i5 750's bottlenecking him
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.