Dual-Core Support??

[gerry]

I dont understand why theyre not answering it, quake 4 was patched to support dual core, how hard can it be to add it? Not very id assume.

[Nail]

I dont understand why theyre not answering it, quake 4 was patched to support dual core, how hard can it be to add it? Not very id assume.

write patch, submit to SD, be hero, how hard can it be ?

[Lanz]

I dont understand why theyre not answering it, quake 4 was patched to support dual core, how hard can it be to add it? Not very id assume.

So, not anwsering us is the same as they haven’t added it? Ok… that… make… sence…

[Isabel_Lucas]

I think the problem with mutli / dual core is the allocation of resources. To get the maximum performance out of the game I’d imagine you need to allocate certain aspects of the game to each core so as to spread the load. eg. game engine 1 core, graphics processing another core etc.

I can’t imagine that being that easily added as an afterthought although clearly from the Quake patch its been done before.

With the way processeors are going, I certainly think we’re going to see quad core within the liftime of the game and possibly shortly after realease. If the game has staying power, then we could be seeing more, so I think it would be a mistake by SD if they didn’t take that into consideration as after all making the game run as smoothly as possible is in their interests as well.

[gerry]

So, not anwsering us is the same as they haven’t added it? Ok… that… make… sence…

Nobody said or insinuated that, just seems weird for something like this to remain unanswered like its some kind of big make or break feature for the game when its not.

[jaybird]

Isabel - it’s not so much that. Programming concurrency is a VERY detailed process, and lack of controls between shared data and threads, for example, can create havoc.

Honestly, I really doubt SD says ANYTHING official about this game at all until right before its release, and more than likely with Activision and/or ID’s approval. You can’t get mad at them for that. If they say something here and word gets out, but for some reason it doesn’t work out, that’s not good. And imagine if they give specs too early, and they change, and people have bought hardware tailored to what was said. That could be nasty. Their silence is well intended.

[SCDS_reyalP]

Nobody said or insinuated that, just seems weird for something like this to remain unanswered like its some kind of big make or break feature for the game when its not.

I don’t see how it is a make or break feature. SMP (whether multi-core or multi-processor) systems are a tiny fraction of the market.

If ET:QW doesn’t run acceptably on current single core systems, THAT would be a big problem for SD. If it does run OK on single core systems, then it will almost certainly run as well on SMP systems of equivalent clockspeed. If they do a good job of implementing multi-threading, it might run a whole lot better on SMP systems.

As for the lack of statements, remember, there is a whole spectrum between a feature implemented or not. They could plan to add it if time is available, they could have it partly implemented but not yet completely working, they could have it working, but not giving big performance gains and so on.

Lanz described very well an another thread the difficulties they face making public statements. In fact I think I’ll just quote it here

You know, since the game isn’t finished yet, the game might have to be balanced further, things might change, things might get removed etc. Comming here and telling us about all those neat functions that still might not be finalised serves no one. Then people will start saying “they lied to us” or “why isn’t that function in any longer” when it’s no longer there or changed dramatically in the final version. For them I guess it’s just better to shut up and keep working on the game than having to explain themself later on and to keep som thunder for the release date. What they do tell us is probably things that wont change that dramatically in the final version.

[Nail]

I trust SD to do what they can to accommodate the biggest audience possible

[Sauron_EFG]

Raven had help from both id and Intel when making Q4 multi-threaded, which shows that it’s not a small thing. Q4/Linux multi-threading still doesn’t give any significant performance boost afaik.

[AO1]

Hello everyone

IMHO it’s pretty obvious you will benefit from a dual core CPU at least to some degree whatever they decide to implement. Streaming the megatexture from disk during gaming with asynchronous read is in reality a second thread (avoids stalling the gameloop while reading from disk).

Additionally making the render backend its own thread like in Quake 4 would be awesome.