3 ms·
We both know that to acheive 60 FPS, you need to update every 16 ms. A 10 ms pause should not prevent you from doing this, provided that your code is appropria
by reality_czech 12y ago
We both know that to acheive 60 FPS, you need to update every 16 ms. A 10 ms pause should not prevent you from doing this, provided that your code is appropriately fast to run in the remaining 6 ms. And if your code is not appropriately fast, you're going to have a lot of trouble dealing with older and slower machines anyway.
Having the latency be capped at 10 ms is an extremely powerful guarantee. It means that even if your machine is not fast enough to play game X one year, next year's machine will be. Because the GC latency doesn't change, and the rest of the program logic will run 2x as fast because of more memory and cores.
If you want to act shocked, shocked that GC has an overhead, then go ahead. If you want to pretend that nobody can ever build a game in a GC langauge (despite the fact that hundreds of thousands have, on Android and other platforms), then go ahead. Hell, even if you want to continue to use C or C++ to squeeze out every last drop of performance, then go ahead. But I find these comments really disingenuous.