The WIP Thread

If it's not ZDoom, it goes here.
User avatar
DrPyspy
Posts: 278
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2015 7:35 pm
Operating System Version (Optional): Windows XP Gangster Edition
Location: Utah, USA

Re: The WIP Thread

Post by DrPyspy »

Accensus
Posts: 2383
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 9:59 am

Re: The WIP Thread

Post by Accensus »

Damn, Doomguy sure let himself go after the events of Doom 2016.
User avatar
Rachael
Posts: 13532
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2004 1:31 pm
Preferred Pronouns: She/Her
Contact:

Re: The WIP Thread

Post by Rachael »

dpJudas wrote:
Rachael wrote:- The "software" light mode, which emulates the actual gradients in OpenGL (I've noticed actually that it's brighter than its software varient, but that's neither here nor there for now :P)
That's actually due to the same bug that softpoly had (there was a bug report back in the day about it). I've been planning on making an adjustment for it, but want to do it as a final fix that also allows the visibility cvar to apply to all three renderers.
:wub: :shock:
DoomKrakken wrote:Is the Software Renderer any faster than the OpenGL Renderer?
Yes and no. It depends on what kind of a system you have.

The software renderer is moderately the same speed on all systems regardless of CPU with very few exceptions: Higher clock speeds, obviously, net faster performance, but systems with only 1 or 2 core CPU's will suffer greatly in performance. Systems with 6 or 8 cores will also see a minor bump in performance but there are huge diminishing returns beyond that point, since performance is bottlenecked in several other areas that can only be managed with a single CPU core.
User avatar
Graf Zahl
Lead GZDoom+Raze Developer
Lead GZDoom+Raze Developer
Posts: 49056
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2003 10:19 am
Location: Germany

Re: The WIP Thread

Post by Graf Zahl »

About the 'software lighting' mode in the hardware renderer, there's one thing that bothers me: Unlike the other modes, it isn't affected by the 'radial' fog mode setting at all. I wonder if that can be changed. Or is the entire formula just too specific to the screen depth value it uses?
User avatar
DoomKrakken
Posts: 3482
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2014 6:45 pm
Location: Plahnit Urff
Contact:

Re: The WIP Thread

Post by DoomKrakken »

Can I have this copy of the mod? I don't care how complete it is, I really want to take a look at that menu code... :D
User avatar
Rachael
Posts: 13532
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2004 1:31 pm
Preferred Pronouns: She/Her
Contact:

Re: The WIP Thread

Post by Rachael »

Graf Zahl wrote:About the 'software lighting' mode in the hardware renderer, there's one thing that bothers me: Unlike the other modes, it isn't affected by the 'radial' fog mode setting at all. I wonder if that can be changed. Or is the entire formula just too specific to the screen depth value it uses?
Yes, it can be, on this line:
https://github.com/coelckers/gzdoom/blo ... in.fp#L121

At the risk of making the shader too complicated (which may impact performance on GL-3.0 hardware, unfortunately), you can add a uniform check on this line to divide by the cosine of the specific screen pixel's angle away from the center of the screen. This will cause z to return a higher value towards the edges of the screen and simulate that radial effect.

Without knowing the actual impact on older hardware, it might be wiser to rewrite the function completely and drop in a replacement when the user requests radial fog. If the check doesn't impede performance much, though, a simple uniform check should suffice.
User avatar
Graf Zahl
Lead GZDoom+Raze Developer
Lead GZDoom+Raze Developer
Posts: 49056
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2003 10:19 am
Location: Germany

Re: The WIP Thread

Post by Graf Zahl »

Rachael wrote:(which may impact performance on GL-3.0 hardware, unfortunately)
The software lighting shader already affects performance on GL 3 hardware quite severely so adding a bit more won't be really worse. The real question is, how much focus should we place on such old hardware?

What we really need is a comprehensive survey to see what kind of hardware people are actually using. I wouldn't be surprised if GL 2 and 3 users are actually just a small minority that's just noticable because they obviously encounter the most problems.
User avatar
Rachael
Posts: 13532
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2004 1:31 pm
Preferred Pronouns: She/Her
Contact:

Re: The WIP Thread

Post by Rachael »

In that case, a simple uniform variable should suffice.
User avatar
Skelegant
Posts: 1432
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2014 2:38 am
Preferred Pronouns: She/Her
Location: All over the walls and floor of E2M8

Re: The WIP Thread

Post by Skelegant »

I may be using a little too much red in this map's colour scheme :D
Image
User avatar
Captain J
 
 
Posts: 16890
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2012 2:20 am
Location: An ancient Escape Shuttle(No longer active here anymore)
Contact:

Re: The WIP Thread

Post by Captain J »

Looks magical and futuristic at the same time... :trippy:
Gez
 
 
Posts: 17834
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:22 pm

Re: The WIP Thread

Post by Gez »

DoomKrakken wrote:Is the Software Renderer any faster than the OpenGL Renderer?
The entire point of hardware-accelerated rendering is that you offload some of the work (namely, the graphical rendering part*) to the GPU, so that the CPU has less to do.

If you have a really crappy GPU and a really good CPU, then software renderer will be faster. Having to wait on a lazy coworker who never obeys deadlines can slow you down more than if you just made all the work yourself, and I guess that's the analogy here.

But generally, hardware will be faster, because that's basically the reason why it exists in the first place.

Also note that software rendering scales poorly with screen size. If you render a 320x240 scene (same size as Doom, though aspect corrected for today's screens that don't handle rectangle pixels well), you have to render 76800 pixels. Now a 800x600 scene is 480000 pixels. 1600*1200 is 1920000 pixels. Notice how we go to a higher order of magnitude each time. Now on the high-end monitors we get resolutions like 5120*2880 (14745600 pixels). And also people have multi-monitor setups, so you can get to have to render a super-wide scene on three monitors, for something like 15360*2880 pixels because why not. So when you have to get the CPU to compute 40 million pixels, it's going to take about 500 times as much time as it needs to render a mere eighty thousands. So I know people can easily get absurd FPS on today's hardware with the original IWAD levels in low resolutions, but you're probably not getting an FPS high enough that'd still be playable if it were divided by 500.

Hardware-accelerated rendering handles high resolutions better, largely because, again, that's basically the reason for its existence.
User avatar
Arctangent
Posts: 1235
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2014 1:53 pm
Contact:

Re: The WIP Thread

Post by Arctangent »

Skelegant wrote:I may be using a little too much red in this map's colour scheme :D
those stained glass things aren't even only suggestive they just straight-up have dicks on them
User avatar
Rachael
Posts: 13532
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2004 1:31 pm
Preferred Pronouns: She/Her
Contact:

Re: The WIP Thread

Post by Rachael »

Arctangent wrote:those stained glass things aren't even only suggestive they just straight-up have dicks on them
Wow - I didn't even see that.
User avatar
DoomKrakken
Posts: 3482
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2014 6:45 pm
Location: Plahnit Urff
Contact:

Re: The WIP Thread

Post by DoomKrakken »

Something tells me that wasn't at all intentional... XD
User avatar
Skelegant
Posts: 1432
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2014 2:38 am
Preferred Pronouns: She/Her
Location: All over the walls and floor of E2M8

Re: The WIP Thread

Post by Skelegant »

In this context, they're symbols of power decorating a demonic mafia nightclub.

In any other context, yes, they're just plain ol' dongers lol
edit: how it looks in action
Spoiler:
Post Reply

Return to “Off-Topic”