![]() Instead I’d recommend to build a small, cheap desktop machine with a moderate CPU (no need to go crazy with 32 cores, FG will only use 3-4) and an nVidia GPU in it. So our utilisation is terrible, but we have no ‘developer affordable’ ways to get it dramatically better in the short term. The minute you do something old-fashioned, you hit slow and weird paths (and bugs): same for many of the open-source drivers. Whereas, the Intel GPUs give pretty good FPS (especially the newer Iris units) … in modern code written to use them efficiently. (Hence why the nVidia drivers are allegedly a larger codebase than the Windows kernel at this point) We especially get away with this because large old CAD applications have the same problems as FG (using archaic OpenGL, and very poor threading) and nVidia has done a lot work making their drivers support these applications well. and then rebuild every aircraft model to use efficient textures, replace all Effects, etc, etc). (and you’d see GPU at 100% and CPU use higher, maybe) But that’s an impossible amount of work, so we are trading your money (what users spend on hardware) for development time (we don’t have five full time developers to ditch OSG and re-write the entire renderer natively using Vulkan / Metal / D3D12. ![]() You can probably run a equivalent or better graphics to FG 2020.3 on your laptop at even 60fps, *if* the renderer was re-written from scratch. So we have no hope of hitting 100% utilisation. ![]() ![]() The problem is that FlightGear’s architecture does not use either CPU efficiently (multi-threading) or GPU efficiently (large draw batches with few state changes). ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |