Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Googolplexed]

Better he only releases stuff like how he did with the renderer. That worked very well so it's a proven model

That too.
There's all this talk about multi-threading, I wish toady would just release the path-finding/watersim code so people can get cracking.

Its all well and good pressuring toady, lets actually come up with a proper solution. Pathfinder is a good project but it would be great to see what toady already has.

[Footkerchief]

That too.
There's all this talk about multi-threading, I wish toady would just release the path-finding/watersim code so people can get cracking.

Its all well and good pressuring toady, lets actually come up with a proper solution. Pathfinder is a good project but it would be great to see what toady already has.

Again: improved pathfinding is #4 on Eternal Suggestion Voting and Toady is committed to working on (or at least considering) the top 10 ESV items soon after the upcoming release.  That item is likely to become a general performance item.  So we should see some movement on these issues in the near future, but it's probably still a few months off at least.  Until then, the best outlet for your frustration is probably helping out with the Pathfinder Project.

[Googolplexed]

Nope, no frustration at toady, its more people here who get angry that toady isn't doing what they want TO HIS OWN GAME.

Personally I don't really have performance issues anyway. My forts generally die out way before then. A few tantrum spirals and an abandon .The only time when I did was when I decided to pump the water from a river faster then it could flow in. That ended badly ....

But yeah, mostly my complaining is people trying to force toady to do something. Although since we don't have code it seams that it's what people mostly try to do.

[profit]

LOL I can only guess your forts dont last too long...

Almost every one of my forts hit Sub 10FPS by the end of their life...

Even with all the stone on the map destroyed they are still slow.. 

If your forts are playable you must have really never did too much with your starting area's

*To be fair my most recent forts major slowdown has come when I made a 3x2 embark tile wide treefarm which produces about 60 trees a season, and a 1x1 embark tile wide obsidian generator, but still.... Maddeningly slow is maddeningly slow either way...  And I only have 87 dorfs in it.

**  To the person who joked about me flying into a berserk rage, I warn you I have (masterwork) adamantine everything on (Including adamantine clothing+socks), with an (masterwork) adamantine warhammer.. and you may wish to glance at my stats... ->
 

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I have single handedly taken on relentless assault sieges, and I have also sent a treent flying nearly 200 tiles.

[Googolplexed]

What can I say, Losing IS fun.

My forts are defective by design

[profit]

Losing isn't really fun..(don't care what the help file says) Losing in a spectacularly awesome way is though =)

I actually consider that winning!

Anyhow.. here is an FPS zero moment in my fort... It was during the flooding of my tree farm.. *I know it says FPS:1 in the corner but that was because it was recently paused, I can assure you I was getting one every few seconds* * I also know the zoom was a bit extreme, as it shows my entire 3x3 embark site, but I wanted to capture a bit of my fort as well.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Just to be perfectly clear... I REALLY FUCKING HATE FPS:0  And would really like my forts to go faster.  I have to say I don't care how that happens.

[Googolplexed]

Losing is fun.
I keep regular saves before an ORC attack(ORC Mod) just to see how many ways my dwarfs can die. I did have a few proper forts a while back though.

Anyway, this topic is for multi-threading as a suggestion and I think we are going a bit off-topic.

That being said though, does anyone else have anything to add about multi-threading as I feel as-though we've been through it all already.

[profit]

LOL yeah I enjoy killing dwarves as well... Just the actual losses to dwarven dumb-assery get old. (examples, an owned item blocking a door that I did not catch and my early fort is rampaged by treents or something, a fire imp setting one dwarf on fire, and everyone grabbing his burning clothing after he dies...)  Actually I did enjoy both those losses... Maybe losing is fun... ehh anyhow..

I think it had been well covered in another thread, and I think I might have stated that at post #3 in this one.. but...  what else do we have to do with our time than rehash old debates.

As for off topic...  LOL I seriously doubt toady read past page one of this, it's not like we are gonna waste anyone important's time =p

And technically saying it will take too long is still off topic, it is a suggestion and really not up to us to determine what is or isn't feasible....  So... really everything after the first post is kinda wasted board space...  But it is kinda soothing (for me) to keep the debate going.. makes me think there might be hope for a faster DF in the future, even though logically I know it's unlikely in the extreme...

[Googolplexed]

The individual cores are slowly getting faster. I mean most code can't easily be multi-threaded so it would be stupid for intel/amd to just keep tacking on new cores.
DF will become playable at some point, even if by then an i7 looks like a 386

[profit]

Unfortunately it doesn't look that way...

As far as I know, the fastest i386 compatible processor ever according to clocks, was a P4EE that was clocked to 5.2 Ghz... using Liquid nitrogen as the coolant.

Nothing intel or AMD have been releasing have been getting faster... actually most have been getting slower, just more cores =/

[Googolplexed]

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/default.aspx?b=38
The first single-threaded benchmark I could find.
The i7 is definitely ahead.

The p4s are woefully inefficient at executing instructions compared to newer processors. Most AMDs at the time outperformed p4s but were lower clockspeed.

Looking at clock-speed alone is a poor way to compare performance.

[KaelGotDwarves]

Posting from my phone, otherwise i'd link you to the images... if you search recent embark posts you'l find it.

In a few benchmarks I tested several 2x2 forts that ranged in 1500 fps to 4800 fps (depending on location features) without optimizing init on an overclocked i7.

Another poster got 2400 fps on a core2quad with no tweaks.

Technology is advancing. i7 and phenomIIs offer greater performance even if clockspeeds aren't faster. It's completely different architecture than pentiums.

So DF is definitely playable, and if it's really bad an upgrade may be in order.

[Googolplexed]

Yeah, I don't have playability issues, I tend to die quickly, and even on my best fortresses my FPS doesn't seam to go below 20. But looking at some screens from profit I can see why his lags.

This one:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

[KaelGotDwarves]

I just saw that. Yeah yikes.

If you want to be messing with water of a size like that you're going to need a computer from the future.

Collapsing half a map and draining an ocean makes my desktop churn. I'd hate to think of attempting it on my core2duo laptop even or anything slower.

[Googolplexed]

I don't think there's anything any of us or toady could do to get that working at decent FPS on any present day CPUs.

4x speed boosts don't matter if your FPS is measured as FPM(Frames per minute)