Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Quake Wars Performance Across Distros

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    Originally posted by energyman View Post
    do yourself a favour and forget that 1000Hz ever existed. 300Hz is a much better choice.
    agreed. for most people 1k is overkill

    Comment


    • #22
      Why should we?

      Comment


      • #23
        who are you asking and what?

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by energyman View Post
          do yourself a favour and forget that 1000Hz ever existed. 300Hz is a much better choice.
          Yeah, I get that feeling too. I also do pro audio so having 1000hz compiled enables me to not have to boot into RT so it serves a dual purpose.

          Comment


          • #25
            Also, if anyone wants the demo I used I put it up on Sendspace. http://www.sendspace.com/file/luf8wi

            Comment


            • #26
              you could still try 300 it has the advantage of being more fine grained than 100 and a lot less overhead than 1000.

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by energyman View Post
                you could still try 300 it has the advantage of being more fine grained than 100 and a lot less overhead than 1000.
                It makes a difference when you're working on an audio project that has 50 tracks going at the same time. On 1000hz I can get my latency down further than I could on 300. I can mix on 300 but not record. I also haven't seen that much of a negative impact considering I mostly just use my system for browsing and writing papers when I'm not doing audio work.

                Comment


                • #28
                  Originally posted by energyman View Post
                  who are you asking and what?
                  Why 1000 should be bad.

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    context switch overhead. Reduced IO performance. A lot of other stuff.

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by energyman View Post
                      context switch overhead. Reduced IO performance. A lot of other stuff.
                      Look at my other benchmarks above, especially on the RT kernel which is essentially an extreme version of cranking up the HZ - albeit a really useful one. Basically the tradeoff is that you get a much more responsive system at the cost of throughput. For my specific case it's worthwhile but I'd imagine for 99% of desktop users voluntary preemption and 300 works great. I can't really tell the difference on a server kernel with no preemption at 100hz on a good multicore processor anyway.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X