3 ms·
I don't disagree with your takeaway, but one nit: games are less sensitive to latency than they are to unexpected latency. You can deal with latency through a n
by eropple 8y ago
I don't disagree with your takeaway, but one nit: games are less sensitive to latency than they are to unexpected latency. You can deal with latency through a number of techniques so long as it's consistent. (IIRC, this is one of the reasons for some of the interesting hardware on the Xbox 360 shrinks - reconfiguring the CPU/GPU package meant that the hardware team had to gimmick it such that games didn't have to suddenly deal with less latency than they'd been intended for.)
- tutanchamun 8y agothanks for the insight, I only ever read "games are sensitive to latency" but not exactly in what way.
- eropple 8y agoNo problem. Just consider it as a scheduling problem. If you know it takes N cycles to load a register (and to be clear, this is no longer something most game developers have to actively care about...though engine developers might...though on very modern consoles even this often ends up abstracted from most engine developers), having that register now be populated at (N-2) or (N+2) cycles might be Very Bad. On the other hand, if you now know that it will populate, always, in (N+4) cycles, you can just work with that.