Mesa 17.1 Will Use A 1GB Shader Cache Limit

[starshipeleven]

relatively(!) small (1 GB is more capacity than my first computer had HDD space)

'dem kids nowadays. We didn't even have HDDs back then when real men had hairs on their chest and programmed in assembler.

[dungeon]

It is user configurable, so who cares... as whatever size they put in won't match everybody

[baka0815]

'dem kids nowadays. We didn't even have HDDs back then when real men had hairs on their chest and programmed in assembler.

Well, my first PC had an HDD of 40MB in size (286), I didn't have any PC without an HDD and I'm mid-thirty. I don't see myself as a kid.

[higuita]

This laptop have a mesa cache of about 40MB and at my home machine, where i play more, i have about 220MB

[M@GOid]

Well, my first PC had an HDD of 40MB in size (286), I didn't have any PC without an HDD and I'm mid-thirty. I don't see myself as a kid.

[baka0815]

@M@GOid
I just wanted to note that those "kids" aren't that young anymore. At the beginning of this century the comment would have been valid.

[geearf]

@M@GOid
I just wanted to note that those "kids" aren't that young anymore. At the beginning of this century the comment would have been valid.

It's all relative, if the previous poster is in his 80s, kids is fine

As for the cache, mine is currently around 20Mb, so 1Gb doesn't look too bad.

[M@GOid]

For all you people that use a bleeding edge distro with this feature enabled, the cache is in ~/.cache/mesa
Could you post your sizes and what games you have?

I have 59 games installed and since I know they delete and replace every time mesa is updated, I fired up about a dozen I knew uses the cache. So my size now is 250MB, using Mesa 17.1 RC1 from x-swat PPA (the "official one") in Kubuntu 17.04.

[starshipeleven]

Well, my first PC had an HDD of 40MB in size (286), I didn't have any PC without an HDD and I'm mid-thirty. I don't see myself as a kid.

I was just pointing out that the perception of size (what is seen as big and what is seen as small regardless of what is big and what is actually small for a modern system) is very subjective with a little joke. I could have quoted Gates or whoever was that said "640k of RAM oughta be enough for everyone" too.

Speaking of relative points of view: for the fictional person I used in the joke that "didn't even have HDDs back then when real men had hairs on their chest and programmed in assembler" you could still be seen as a kid as he would be in his 50-70ies (hard drives became relatively common in late 80s, and assembler was created in 1968).

EDIT: the "kids" thing is valid where I live, anyway. It's not uncommon here for older people to call "kids" adults of a different generation (generation= more than 25 years of difference). I don't know the customs of your place.

[M@GOid]

@M@GOid
I just wanted to note that those "kids" aren't that young anymore. At the beginning of this century the comment would have been valid.

To be fair, in the 80's, to a computer have a HDD it must be a high end IBM PC or Apple Machintosh, well north of $1,000. All of the low end machines, like 8 and 16 bits computers (Apple II, Commodore 64, Amiga, Atari ST) only have a ROM ship with a very simple SO and Basic. Storage was handled by floppy disks and/or cassetes.

So his joke made sense in the 80's.