Liste des Groupes | Revenir à c arch |
On 19/09/2024 00:54, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:You actually need 20 Hz/50 ms even for joystick/mouse response when you ar enot in a hurry. (Was proven by the space station external arm joystick controller which was initially specified to operate at 10 Hz, but that turned out to be far too laggy for the astronauts so it was doubled to 20 Hz.On Wed, 18 Sep 2024 16:23:01 +0000, MitchAlsup1 wrote:In human terms, those 400 memory cycles are completely negligible. For most purposes, anything else than 100 milliseconds is an instant
>On the other hand, and this is where the deprecation of the CPUs come>
in, The engines consuming the data are bandwidth machines {GPUs and
Inference engines} which are quite insensitive to latency (they are not
not latency bound machines like CPUs).
>
When doing GPUs, a memory access taking 400 cycles would hardly degrade
the overall GPU performance--while it would KILL any typical CPU
architecture.
But if it’s supposed to be for “interactive†use, it’s still going to take
those 400 memory-cycle times to return a response.
response. For high-speed games played by experts, 10 milliseconds is a good target. For the most demanding tasks, such as making music, 1 millisecond might be required.My cousin Nils has hearing loss after a lifetime spent in studios and playing music, he can't use the offered hearing aids because they add 3-4 ms of latency. (Something which he noticed _immediately_ when first trying a pair.)
For anything interactive, an extra 400 memory cycles latency means nothing - even if it is relatively slow memory - as long as you can keep the throughput. Network latency is massively bigger than this extra memory latency would be.Early multiplayer games had to invent all sorts of tricks to try to hide away that latency, and well before that, around 1987 (?) I made a version of my terminal emulator which could do the same:
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.