PC game industry gearing up for multi-core generation |
Ó
Soon, the software industry even followed suit, offering everything from multi-core, multi-processor capable operating systems to 64-bit ready kernels.However, even as time dragged on, the game industry tucked tails and didn't catch up. With true-blue hardcore gamers shifting from 3 GHz beasts to 2.4 GHz multi-cores, it finally dawned on the many game devs that the time to adopt their titles to multi-core processing was now. Better late than never.
Chris Taylor's Supreme Commander was one of the very (few) first to have been designed from the ground up with multi-core processing in mind. Released last February, it took advantage of the extra core to simulate more realistic AI, while providing enough processing power to handle epic numbers of units in a significantly large map.
But then many other PC games, including Blizzard Entertainment's World of Warcraft, and id Software's Quake 4 and Doom 3 were patched to take advantage of an extra processing core. It wasn't as optimal a solution as Supreme Commander, but according to Ted Pollak of Jon Peddie Research, "It won't give the same kind of performance, but it's going to help, and it's better than nothing."
But since the developers spend too much time and resources designing a game from the ground up (and that's with middleware, pre-acquired graphics engine code and an army of devs, folks), the one reason why a game developer turned its back on Intel's drive for multi-core games is the more time needed to adopt a serial coded game to parallel processing platforms.
Thanks to RapidMind, the guys behind the development platform for IBM's CELL BE processor, a solution for the multi-core development is ready for use. Ray DePaul, CEO of RapidMind, said, "It's a way to continue to use serial programming but achieve a parallel approach to data parallelism."
Their solution makes use of a similar development platform used for the CELL 8-core processor: an x86 version of an application programming interface (API) that will accept serial programming code and decide how to distribute the processing load to the cores available to the software. PeakStream is one other multi-core solutions provider that has an API very similar to RapidMind's.
So all those early adopters and hardware enthusiasts out there take note: soon you'll be able to finally tout real scores from benchies on true-blue, multi-core designed games. But what would that mean for a good percentage of single-core users still out there?
Contact Us:
The QJ.net Network |
 |
| Site | Feed |
| QJ.NET | RSS |
| Nintendo DS | RSS |
| PlayStation 3 | RSS |
| PSP Updates | RSS |
| Wii | RSS |
| Xbox 360 | RSS |
| MMORPG | RSS |
| Personal Computer Games | RSS |
| iPhone - iPod Touch | RSS |
| QJ.NET Forums | RSS |
Add QJ.NET
User Favorites - December
User Favorites - December
Categories
Archives
Accessories
Artwork
Betas, Testing
Deals
Demo
Drivers
Events
Featured Articles
Genre
Guides, Tips, and Tricks
Hardware
Humor
Interviews
Lore
Mods
News
Off Topic
On Shelves This Week
Opinions & Analysis
Patches
Previews
Reviews
Rumors
Scans
Screenshots
Site News
Steam
Titles
Utilities
Videos
Windows Live
XNA Studio Homebrew
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
Comments [refresh]
Personally I am all for more cores to work with. It may take some more think tank time, but in the end it pays off. There are many ways of going about this without even having to use core prediction, for example, heavy duty particles handled on one, physics on another, AI on another. I see great things ahead for us with multi-core processing.