Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Interested in a FREE copy of HTML5 game maker Construct 2?

We'll be giving away three Personal Edition licences in next Tuesday's GDNet Direct email newsletter!

Sign up from the right-hand sidebar on our homepage and read Tuesday's newsletter for details!


We're also offering banner ads on our site from just $5! 1. Details HERE. 2. GDNet+ Subscriptions HERE. 3. Ad upload HERE.


Timing in win32


Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.

  • You cannot reply to this topic
8 replies to this topic

#1 Hw   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 14 October 1999 - 12:42 AM

I'm having a problem with timings when doing a d3d app with borland cbuilder 4. It seems that windows' timers can't handle higher frequencies than ~20Hz (even if I set the interval to 1ms!). As directx offers no solution, how am I supposed to get a timer with freq in range of 50-100Hz? Any suggestions?


Sponsor:

#2 VirtualNext   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 04 October 1999 - 12:26 AM

Use the function

DWORD GetTickCount(VOID)

VirtualNext


#3 Hw   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 04 October 1999 - 01:43 AM

Hmm... You're suggesting an infine loop in main routine? Damn, that's method I used years ago in DOS (before using the PIT)... Somehow, I just don't like the idea...

Oh well. Guess I just have to live with it.


#4 Sphet   Members   -  Reputation: 631

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 04 October 1999 - 06:36 AM

I think it ultimately becomes an infinite loop, unless you are doing a non-time-dependant stratedgy came. Just don't forget to service the message queue with PeekMessage and PostMessages. Take a look at the DirectX samples..

#5 Splat   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 08 October 1999 - 04:10 PM

GetTickCount works as a backup, but since we are in Windows we might as well check for the existance of a high-resolution timer The following code should work:

int timerFrequency;
if (!QueryPerformanceTimer(&timerFrequency)) {
// Insert fall back code using GetTickCount here
}
else {
// A high resolution timer exists, the number of "ticks" per second is in timerFrequency
int currTime;
QueryPerformanceCounter(&currTime);
// Now we have the current tick count in currTime
}

So, basically you just need QueryPerformanceCounter and Frequency, and both can be included in with "winbase.h" (or i think if you use other WinAPI functions bay already be included)


#6 Hw   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 10 October 1999 - 10:33 PM

In fact, I found multimedia timer, which makes things pretty easy with its 1ms resolution... Now my timer set to 100Hz gives me 110 counts per second... Oh well, guess you can't have everything. Just one question arises; do interrupts overlap in single thread? For example, if I'm doing software rendering called in event handler (slow), do I still get new events to move objects etc?, or should I make scene rendering a thread which is executed whenever needed?

#7 Niels   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 11 October 1999 - 03:22 AM

I'd opt for the multithreaded approach, but then again, that's just how I work. Huge single threaded programs tend to become rather nasty, but ofcourse, you avoid the more curious thread-related bugs...

I personally find seperating the game in 4 threads connected with queues very usefull. One for "AI" (essentially anything complicated that require lots of processing and doesn't need to update with the same frequency as the framerate), one for rendering, one for UI and one for networking.

/Niels


#8 Splat   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 13 October 1999 - 12:00 PM

Well, even though computers are much faster than they used to be, you still must be aware of speed traps. Multithreading for example. Yes, it makes code all nice and neat and logical (that it, until you get into locking/unlocking thread related problems which are hard to debug) but you must understand that for just about any game a single threaded main game loop is just about the optimal way to program it.

The problem with your multithreaded approach is that there are several more threads that you don't even seem. For example, Flip() spawns a thread, async WinSock spawns a thread, etc. At most I could definately see a need for a second thread that handle's non-framerate dependant low priority stuff like AI, but the rest you might as well put into a well-organized main loop that will in the long run save you debugging time, speed up your program, ease portability AND readability issues and just make for a better program


#9 Niels   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 14 October 1999 - 12:42 AM

Ok, fanzy pants, beat this :
http://home.worldonline.dk/~noshit/scrshots.html

(35fps on a 90Mhz pentium with 4Meg VMem, 90fps on a 400 PII (limited by screen refresh rate))..

But you're right - unless you do a proper design, your threads will spend more time waiting for each other, than getting actual work done....

/Niels

[This message has been edited by Niels (edited October 14, 1999).]





Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.



PARTNERS