Possible to have gpu acceleration multi core support? (cuda cores)?

[Roflcake]

I noticed that gang garrison is inefficient at utilizing available resources such as processor cores and graphics cores.

Would it be possible to recode gang garrison to allow more efficient multicore support and effectively cut down on lag?

[ubd]

Yes, but this would most likely affect the artificial intelligence core as well as the personality core, causing an imbalance in system administration and allowing any remaining human rebel groups to infiltrate our kill-bot system control, further delaying a technological take-over of the cockroaches known as homo sapien.

[Roflcake]

 

[ubd]

The best method would be to send out a disguised human "probe" so to speak to infiltrate any rebel groups. This, coupled with sending out renewed numbers of drones, would ensure maximum efficiency until the titanium/silicon alloy present in the upcoming series 3000 of the Death-Walkers is molded and ready.

While lag may still be present, rest assured that the extinction of Man is imminent.

[I_am_awesome]

I am pretty sure that's not possible, due to game maker being pretty shitty.

[Vindicator]

Gang Garrison 2 runs perfectly fine as it is. Game Maker is incapable of multi-core support, but the game wouldn't need it anyway as it runs the intended FPS even with high player loads. The only problem really is inefficient code, but this is on Game Maker's part as opposed to ours.

[Roflcake]

i wasnt intending on making it sound troll but why not utilize all cores available?
is that not a good idea?

but the conclusion is that game maker is shitty and it's not possible

[NAGN]

Game Maker is very single threaded

it is possible to take advantage of multiple threads, as I've doneso on experimental projects with other extensions, however it's pretty buggy, and I wouldn't recommend it

[Neal_Shireman]

The best method would be to send out a disguised human "probe" so to speak to infiltrate any rebel groups. This, coupled with sending out renewed numbers of drones, would ensure maximum efficiency until the titanium/silicon alloy present in the upcoming series 3000 of the Death-Walkers is molded and ready.

While lag may still be present, rest assured that the extinction of Man is imminent.

And on the 7th day, Uberdeath was born

[Vindicator]

i wasnt intending on making it sound troll but why not utilize all cores available?
is that not a good idea?

but the conclusion is that game maker is shitty and it's not possible

The reason why the space shuttle has (had) computers weaker then our pocket calculators was because they fulfilled their purposes and nothing more was needed.

If the game runs at the speed it's supposed to while using only 1 core, than why should we go through the trouble of allowing multi-core support, only to have it not use the other cores anyway since it never needed it?

But yes. Game Maker is derp.

[NAGN]

because the game runs pretty badly linearly and means that stuff such as gib physics are placed at as high of priority as networking and positioning?

[Vindicator]

because the game runs pretty badly linearly and means that stuff such as gib physics are placed at as high of priority as networking and positioning?

...and still functions at 30 fps despite it? If you have a computer that is incapable of handling these gib levels, that also means that you probably aren't using a multi-core, and also do not own a GPU capable of using CUDA.

[NAGN]

not multi core per say but multi threading would actually benefit the game pretty well

[Roflcake]

honestly the reason why i started this thread was cause I'm hosting this on a core i7 mobile edition. i've done as much as possible to cut down on the lag both system-wise and network-wise (disable gibs, disable sound, set higher priority from the task manager and configure QoS on my routers)
there are times when i host on my desktop core i7 and it makes a huge difference due to clock speed

the other cores are idling while one core is taking the brunt of the work.
inefficient?
yes.
usable?
yes
laggy?
yes

Vindicator, i still dont see why you dont think having multicore/multithreading is a good idea

i wasnt intending on making it sound troll but why not utilize all cores available?
is that not a good idea?

but the conclusion is that game maker is shitty and it's not possible

The reason why the space shuttle has (had) computers weaker then our pocket calculators was because they fulfilled their purposes and nothing more was needed.

If the game runs at the speed it's supposed to while using only 1 core, than why should we go through the trouble of allowing multi-core support, only to have it not use the other cores anyway since it never needed it?

But yes. Game Maker is derp.

You have to realize that our computers aren't configured ONLY for running Gang Garrison (the space shuttle ONLY had a computer to run calculations based off of raw data, no graphics to hamper the cpu). Our computers have to run an operating system... which also takes up processing power at times.


Now this brings me to something else, but i'm not sure if other forum members brought this up before. Is there a way to host GG2 from a console only, purely dedicated, without running the graphical part of the game? Kinda like a separate .exe for dedicated hosting but without the lag of processing the actual graphics of the game?

But then again... I realize this is a request beyond what the coders may want to handle.. and it's just a suggestion I want to throw out.

[Vindicator]

You have to realize that our computers aren't configured ONLY for running Gang Garrison (the space shuttle ONLY had a computer to run calculations based off of raw data, no graphics to hamper the cpu). Our computers have to run an operating system... which also takes up processing power at times.


Now this brings me to something else, but i'm not sure if other forum members brought this up before. Is there a way to host GG2 from a console only, purely dedicated, without running the graphical part of the game? Kinda like a separate .exe for dedicated hosting but without the lag of processing the actual graphics of the game?

But then again... I realize this is a request beyond what the coders may want to handle.. and it's just a suggestion I want to throw out.

You can't take the specifics from my analogy and apply it here. My point was that we don't need to do what is unnecessary.

While doing all those things do in fact reduce the cpu load, it's really not doing much, as the game would run just as fast as it would without it. (save for gibs, but as a server, disabling gibs is a given).

When the game is running at 30 frames per second, you are literally seeing the best that the game can run. Lag is, at that point, completely due to the inefficiencies of Game Maker which, again, is out of our control.

And I know that you are currently running at 30fps because if you were not, the "lag" would be so horrendous no one would ever play on your server, because the incongruity between the client and server would cause everything to be out of place and skipping around.

I also know that you are currently running at 30fps, because I used to host 3 servers, each running on a different core of an AMD x3 at 2.8ghz, which ran perfectly. In addition to that, I ran a server on a Pentium 4 single core, which also ran perfectly. You can see how using multiple cores on an i7 would be insignificant when it can be run by a P4.

The idea of a dedicated server has come up often, but it is an impossibility due to Game Maker, as the game relies on Game Maker's calculation of collisions. The only way we could create a dedicated server is by completely rewriting it in another language which, you guessed it, is out of the question.