Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

#Actualtonemgub

Posted 13 November 2013 - 12:58 PM

 


Waitable-timer resolution is the same as  the system timer resolution.

Do the he said what??

Citation needed.

 

A waitable timer as as accurate as any other event, which is nearly down to the microsecond.Though of course no guarantees.

 

 

L. Spiro

 

Well, I don't think Microsoft broke it's terse power-saving rules just to make this specific type of timer more responsive... Then again, I never used it, but I have used an tested (against QPC) most of the other thread-sync events, and they all ran at approximately the system-timer resolution (15ms by default). I then also found some articles that mentioned this - can't remember where, so I don't think I am mistaken about waitable timers, really. But I'd be more than happy to be proved wrong. smile.png

 

 


A waitable timer makes the waiting thread ready and higher priority at the exact time the time is up.

That doesn't help much, for two reasons:

1) Most games already use the highest process&thread prioritiy available

2) The thread becomes active between intervals of the system timer - you can only hope that it becomes active sooner than later.


#2tonemgub

Posted 13 November 2013 - 12:57 PM

 


Waitable-timer resolution is the same as  the system timer resolution.

Do the he said what??

Citation needed.

 

A waitable timer as as accurate as any other event, which is nearly down to the microsecond.Though of course no guarantees.

 

 

L. Spiro

 

Well, I don't think Microsoft broke it's terse power-saving rules just to make this specific type of timer more responsive... Then again, I never used it, but I have used an tested (against QPC) most of the other thread-sync events, and they all ran at approximately the system-timer resolution (15ms by default). I then also found some articles that mentioned this - can't remember where, so I don't think I am mistaken about waitable timers, really. But I'd be more than happy to be proved wrong. smile.png


A waitable timer makes the waiting thread ready and higher priority at the exact time the time is up.

That doesn't help much, for two reasons:

1) Most games already use the highest process&thread prioritiy available

2) The thread becomes active between intervals of the system timer


#1tonemgub

Posted 13 November 2013 - 12:53 PM

 


Waitable-timer resolution is the same as  the system timer resolution.

Do the he said what??

Citation needed.

 

A waitable timer as as accurate as any other event, which is nearly down to the microsecond.Though of course no guarantees.

 

 

L. Spiro

 

Well, I don't think Microsoft broke it's terse power-saving rules just to make this specific type of timer more responsive... Then again, I never used it, but I have used an tested (against QPC) most of the other thread-sync events, and they all ran at approximately the system-timer resolution (15ms by default). I then also found some articles that mentioned this - can't remember where, so I don't think I am mistaken about waitable timers, really. But I'd be more than happy to be proved wrong. :)


PARTNERS