| ▲ | codedokode a day ago |
| And obviously all computers have infinite capacity batteries to maintain game-level power consumption. |
|
| ▲ | SkiFire13 a day ago | parent | next [-] |
| Depending on what you're doing GPU accelerated rendering is more battery friendly than CPU rendering though. |
| |
| ▲ | codedokode 20 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | How long can a phone run on a battery when playing games? A day? Or an hour? Clearly shows how "efficient" GPU is. | | | |
| ▲ | LoganDark a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | Drawing the entire interface is more expensive than drawing only what changed, though. You don't have to give up the GPU for that. | | |
| ▲ | SkiFire13 9 hours ago | parent [-] | | The GPU will re-render everything anyway. What you can at most optimize is the upload of data to the GPU (i.e. upload only what has changed). Also consider that if your UI framework supports z-level, opacity and other features like that then determining what has changed for rendering is much more complex than just determining what UI elements have changed. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | LoganDark a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| That's actually a very good point, I haven't seen any care for power consumption from software developers in many many years. The only people who seem to still care about it are hardware developers like Valve and Apple. I admit I never thought about it myself either. I would figure that doing less work generally requires less power, but some developers are crazy and act like they own the whole CPU, generate tons of heat, stress out the cooling system etc. with multithreaded bullshit that did NOT need to be multithreaded. |
| |
| ▲ | proneb1rd a day ago | parent [-] | | Not sure why multi threading is a victim. It really depends. | | |
| ▲ | LoganDark a day ago | parent [-] | | It does indeed depend. Some multithreaded workloads will use the full logical processor count to pin every core and that can really suck on low-end systems. I think aside from balancing multithreading overhead, this is one of the reasons why some more advanced software (such as 7-Zip) lets you select the number of threads to use for a workload, even if you already know and accept that it'll be expensive until it's completed. Lots of multithreading things I come across as a developer have a default of something like 4 threads, or only use a certain fraction of logical cores up to a certain maximum, etc. because it's generally more polite not to always pin every core. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | rixed a day ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Or are plugged into a world with infinite quantity of renewable energy. |
| |
