Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 31

Thread: Quake Wars Performance Across Distros

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Toronto/North Bay Canada
    Posts
    877

    Default

    Quote 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

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    833

    Default

    Why should we?

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,726

    Default

    who are you asking and what?

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    13

    Default

    Quote 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.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    13

    Default

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

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,726

    Default

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

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    13

    Default

    Quote 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.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    833

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by energyman View Post
    who are you asking and what?
    Why 1000 should be bad.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,726

    Default

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

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    13

    Default

    Quote 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.

Posting Permissions

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