Print

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

[Baughn]

I do, actually; it turns out that it's somewhere between inconvenient and impossible to do the calculations I want in the geometry shader. That's a pity, since it means that data going from the vertex to the fragment shader must be copied in the gometry shader.

It's still a win, though.

[Harmonica]

I think I'll be okay since I limit the game to run at 20FPS anyway, because I'm weird like that (I like my dwarves to move around nice and slowly!).

[WormSlayer]

Adding a geometry shader increases framerate by 50%, from 330 to 485, so I think I'm just going to do that by default. It's a win because it means the vertex shader gets run once per tile instead of six times in duplicate; that's using my very simple default vertex shader on an 8600GTM, which is pretty much the worst case for this geometry shader optimization.



(And the framerate is normally limited to 50. I don't think we're going to run into GPU speed issues anytime soon.)

Dont worry; it'll soon grind to a halt under my inept programming skills

[ginsweater]

Adding a geometry shader increases framerate by 50%, from 330 to 485, so I think I'm just going to do that by default. It's a win because it means the vertex shader gets run once per tile instead of six times in duplicate; that's using my very simple default vertex shader on an 8600GTM, which is pretty much the worst case for this geometry shader optimization.

That's great news! And way higher than the static analysis tools I've been using have been suggesting framerate will be on that series. (I guess NVShaderPerf lies. I don't know why I'm surprised by this.)

I've now gotten my basic blend shader (don't know if it works, but it compiles!) down to the range of 30 instructions or so. Right now I'm doing blends purely in the fragment shader, which seems to mean doing 9 texture lookups, which is pretty expensive. (But of course too small for branches to help.) I think there should be a way to expand the tile edges and blend using the fixed-function hardware, but I haven't quite gotten the math down yet...

[Baughn]

Well, NVShaderPerf probably doesn't realize that the screen buffer ("usamplerBuffer tile_array") usually fits in L1 cache. Though.. it shouldn't be *that* much of a difference. Oh well.

[oolon1]

I'm.. continually amazed that people actually run DF on computers that old.

Don't you get really low framerates?

Considering clock speeds haven't increased in a few years, and DF really only uses one core, I'm not surprised.  I'm running a three year old E6750, but it's overclocked to 3.2 GHz.  I'm guessing it runs DF about as well as any i7 at the same clock speed.  40-50 fps with a full fort (assuming I don't get the dreaded spatter replication bug, which I try very hard to avoid).

[qwert]

I'm.. continually amazed that people actually run DF on computers that old.

Don't you get really low framerates?

Considering clock speeds haven't increased in a few years, and DF really only uses one core, I'm not surprised.  I'm running a three year old E6750, but it's overclocked to 3.2 GHz.  I'm guessing it runs DF about as well as any i7 at the same clock speed.  40-50 fps with a full fort (assuming I don't get the dreaded spatter replication bug, which I try very hard to avoid).

Surprisingly, from the fps test thread, you can clearly see that while GHz does matter for similar chips, between architectures it means almost nothing. As an example, my i5 750 @ 2.56 GHz got 10-20 more fps than someone with your cpu running at 2.66, and I normally overclock it to 3.8.

[riffraffselbow]

I'm.. continually amazed that people actually run DF on computers that old.

Don't you get really low framerates?

Considering clock speeds haven't increased in a few years, and DF really only uses one core, I'm not surprised.  I'm running a three year old E6750, but it's overclocked to 3.2 GHz.  I'm guessing it runs DF about as well as any i7 at the same clock speed.  40-50 fps with a full fort (assuming I don't get the dreaded spatter replication bug, which I try very hard to avoid).

Surprisingly, from the fps test thread, you can clearly see that while GHz does matter for similar chips, between architectures it means almost nothing. As an example, my i5 750 @ 2.56 GHz got 10-20 more fps than someone with your cpu running at 2.66, and I normally overclock it to 3.8.

Just look at the P4's. The general consensus is that the architecture was designed around getting large numbers for Ghz, no matter the actual performance.

[blub-dwarf]

hey one easy question

is it posible to shrink your mod to 9x9 or 11x11 ? do i need to shrink every single dwarf or can i just shirnk the hole picture?

i saw a realy nice 9x9 mod but with too little grafiks so i thought i could shrink yours to see more on my little lcd

[krenshala]

I converted the Phoebus set to use the Terminus tileset and noticed that the dwarves and animals were the normal 16x16, but being rendered in 11x11, so you should be able to do the same with this one.  I'm not sure if there is any extra workload caused by rendering the images this way over ones that are at the correct 11x11 to match the rest of the tiles, however.

[Ironhand]

With Baughn's stuff, you can just scroll your mouse wheel and it'll shrink and grow the tiles.
Or if you make the window smaller, it'll shrink them so that 80 tiles can always fit horizontally.

[Baughn]

Right, but keep in mind that you only get proper resizing in 2D mode at the moment. That is no longer the case for my development code, however, so in one or two releases it won't be an issue.

[Sean Mirrsen]

I've just thought of something. This doesn't relate to the 'set per se, but you seem to be more active here, Baughn. Do the separated text fonts mean that we can actually start to... translate Dwarf Fortress? It'd be a very mangled translation, sure, especially for the Russian language that I'm thinking of, but would it actually work? As in, would DF understand and properly render cyrillic fonts?

[Baughn]

..I can't believe I'm saying this.

Yes, it's theoretically possible with what we've got now, or are about to get, at least.

Given the generated text, though.. it would *not* look good. You'd probably be better off passing those bits through babelfish in realtime.

[Carpman]

Thats weird, for some reason this messes up my worldgens (for example, if I take world parameters from the internet and try to generate them, it comes out different than it should).

Is there a way to fix this? Is it a problem on my end?

Sorry if I was unclear about this, and thanks in advance.