Image Map Image Map
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 33

Thread: Maker4D the RPG Game Maker Engine

  1. Default

    two of my previous reply lost to the portal engine and i am lazy to retype them because they was very long, they contained benchmark results from the last update, they contained updates on the engine, and so on. so i summarize up within a few lines. trixter: i optimize this engine only to get overall speed-up in every platform, due to this i was already able to speed-up the code so now its playable on android phones and such. but doing specific optimizations for pentium1 in 2019 will not happen, (its just as a bad idea like when people use some shoddy hardware accelerated shader convention which will not existist within 3 year, just that would be the opposite end of bad decisions). profiling is only possible for script-languages where a line of code is 100 clock cycle, but not for c which compiles real code due to heay superscalar design and caching.

    for gigabite, i typed some very long toughts for you for your previous reply, but i forgot what it was. yes, sdl is a bloatware, and i dont use it. (i use it on android, because i was lazy to learn android api, but not on windows or linux, there i only use os-based apis to interact with the system). btw you was right, cyrix wasnt able to boot the -586 kernel, and k5 also failed to boot it, so 6x86L is more close to 486 than to pentium.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Chicagoland, Illinois, USA
    Posts
    5,780
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    April 24th: "I have decided to optimize this game engine to be able to run on 486's, P1 class computers."
    May 3rd: "i optimize this engine only to get overall speed-up in every platform", "doing specific optimizations for pentium1 in 2019 will not happen"

    Time to end this discussion?
    Offering a bounty for:
    - The software "Overhead Express" (doesn't have to be original, can be a copy)
    - A working Sanyo MBC-775, Olivetti M24, or Logabax 1600
    - Documentation and original disks for: Panasonic Sr. Partner, Zenith Z-160 series
    - Music Construction Set, IBM Music Feature edition (has red sticker on front stating IBM Music Feature)

  3. #23

    Default

    That's what I find baffling here. Not optimizing for obsolete systems is a valid choice, but making that choice while also claiming that you're trying to support those systems is fantasy.
    Computers: Amiga 1200, DEC VAXStation 4000/60, DEC MicroPDP-11/73
    Synthesizers: Roland JX-10/SH-09/MT-32/D-50, Yamaha DX7-II/V50/TX7/TG33/FB-01, Korg MS-20 Mini/ARP Odyssey/DW-8000/X5DR, Ensoniq SQ-80, E-mu Proteus/2, Moog Satellite, Oberheim SEM
    "'Legacy code' often differs from its suggested alternative by actually working and scaling." - Bjarne Stroustrup

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Posts
    1,468

    Default

    You could write an engine to support 20 year old hardware, but you'd have to limit any features you want to work on the least common denominator, the 20 year old hardware.

    You could modularize the renderer like the Half-Life engine, so you'd have several rendering paths (Software, OpenGL, Direct3D and Glide) if you wanted more modern machines to have better detail and such, but that's a lot of extra work.

    Though I'm not really sure what the OP is trying to do, as they're waffling around.

  5. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by commodorejohn View Post
    That's what I find baffling here. Not optimizing for obsolete systems is a valid choice, but making that choice while also claiming that you're trying to support those systems is fantasy.
    i think It works so far as i was able to pump to 2fps (cyrix 250) so im slowly converging the speed to sort of playable frame rates.
    its actually already sort of playable with stronger socket7 cpu-s so i already succeeded with this strategy just with a few good algorithmic optimizations.

    GiGaBiTe: i would like to stuck with software rendering althrough with hardware rendering this would run about 10 fps which probably not worths destroying the simplicity of the code.

    and here is new ideas i came up:
    Half down the resolution of the 3D rendering
    I canceled this idea after measuring the fps in smaller window with smaller resolution. It turns out that decreasing the resolution does not gives any notable boost (50% resolution decrease results 30% speed boost) which indicates i must work on other bottlenecks instead (such as the ones in the vertex processing), and keep the current resolution.

    Optimizing the vertex processing
    I decided to optimize the code in the renderer that calculates with the vertices. I was able to remove some dupicated code, removed some divisions but this only gave me an additional 2% speed-up which i ruled unsignificant

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Posts
    1,468

    Default

    Are you doing hidden surface removal, or rendering everything? You shouldn't be rendering polygons the viewport can't see from its current viewing angle.

  7. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GiGaBiTe View Post
    Are you doing hidden surface removal, or rendering everything? You shouldn't be rendering polygons the viewport can't see from its current viewing angle.
    i cull objects beyond camera. however, there is almost nothing to cull in this practicular engine.

    the engine does not supports normals so backface culling is not possible.

    btw i discovered a bug today that resulted reloading a file from the disk in every frame. that have probably meant another 0.01 fps.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Chicagoland, Illinois, USA
    Posts
    5,780
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Geri View Post
    the engine does not supports normals so backface culling is not possible.
    How many polygons are you drawing per frame?
    Offering a bounty for:
    - The software "Overhead Express" (doesn't have to be original, can be a copy)
    - A working Sanyo MBC-775, Olivetti M24, or Logabax 1600
    - Documentation and original disks for: Panasonic Sr. Partner, Zenith Z-160 series
    - Music Construction Set, IBM Music Feature edition (has red sticker on front stating IBM Music Feature)

  9. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Trixter View Post
    How many polygons are you drawing per frame?
    8000 where i measure it, but depending on the map it can be about 4000 to 20000

  10. Default

    more updates:

    1. i made the animation of far-away characters to skip a frame, allowing a small 10% speed increase.

    2. i changed my mind and added the resolution halving - if the fps goes below 6, the resolution is divided by 2 on the y coordinate, halving down the rendering resolution. when the fps goes above 12, it restores the normal operation. this will probably give a 30-35% speed increase.

    With the help of the last 3 update, the engine will probably run bethwen 3 and 4 fps on the Cyrix. This would mean the middle-class socket7 platform to reach sort of playable frame rates. i will measure it soon.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •