In response to Zaoshi Kaba;
It's no different then the engine in your car.... Good for about 100000 miles, assuming normal driving conditions. But if you have a tendency to keep the revs up at 8,000 your not going to get there and the possibility of major failure is greatly increased if the vehicle is redlining.
That's just usual deterioration. Everything wears down eventually and that's not software's (or in car's case fuel's/road's) fault. GPU was old and for unknown reasons it caught fire instead of downclocking.
If you take old enough computer it'll have troubles playing high resolution movie, doesn't mean it's supposed to explode just because it works at 100%.
That's just usual deterioration. Everything wears down eventually and that's not software's (or in car's case fuel's/road's) fault. GPU was old and for unknown reasons it caught fire instead of downclocking.
If you take old enough computer it'll have troubles playing high resolution movie, doesn't mean it's supposed to explode just because it works at 100%.
The fact is that it has happened before. While we would like to think that hardware and drivers are smart enough now to no longer do this it can still happen.
It has happened to me before also. Without overclocking and with a GPU that was in good shape it did get overheated by a game that VSync turned off at the menu like was stated. I remember seeing numerous of posts on the games forums about it. The developers came out and released a patch for the issue. Exactly like StarCraft 2.
Hell their are even 360 games (one that was released last year) that wold overheat certain driving wheels. Game did not not have proper force feedback programmed and a couple users wheel went out because the game would overheat them. I don't see this as any different than GPU overheating. The wheels hardware and drivers should be smart enough so this doesn't happen yet it still did happen. Sadly this game never did release a patch on the 360 that fully fixed this issue. Issue only happened on the 360 didn't happen on the PS3 version of the game.
Though I feel this thread has gone off topic to more talking about hardware overheating.
I am completing some beginner projects with c++ and SDL and I've read most of the lazy foo and sdltutorials. Up until now I used "frame independent movement" (as one of the tutorials explains) in the games I've made. Searching around I saw that the code in many tutorials uses regulated frame rate (using SDL_Delay). I was thinking witch method is better? Since with "frame independent" the program can run in my pc at about 175 fps isn't it better to just leave it uncapped?
I am in a learning process right now and I'd like to learn from people here on this matter. Thanks in advance!
I would say it almost entirely depends on the game you have.
Normally you want to allow the user the option of turning vsync on, the only real reason for vsync is to prevent screen tearing(which arguably is not as big a problem as it once was.) Most games tend to leave it disabled at the start and let the user enable it if they require it.
Pros:
Cons:
Personally I don't at all agree with some of the other posters here that you should consider capping framerate simply due to the fact a user's hardware might overheat, I see that as a hardware flaw and problem more than a software one.
Does that mean you shouldn't take it into consideration? Of course not, there is something to be said about vsync being enabled on things like game menus, these places of course should be expected to render at a very high rate compared to being actually ingame, and enabling vsync or at least putting a frame cap on might be beneficial here.
But like I said, what it comes down to is what you think the behavior might be. Frankly I have not once in the last few years seen screen tearing on any game with vsync disabled, it is almost a moot issue to most people anymore, and why it is usually optional. But consequently if you were making pong or something you wouldn't need it running at 300 FPS either.
I'm sorry if I'm not really pointing to one option or the other, I definitely think if you don't want to give the players a choice to enable it or disable it then what you leave it "stuck" at is a matter of personal opinion and it comes down to if you are more worried about low FPS or screen tearing.
So you're basically saying it's normal that GPU is unable to operate at full power?It's not anyone's fault. But it's possible to add unnecessary wear and tear to things.
Following your logic Prime95 supposed to overheat and fry CPU as well. That's NOT normal, it's hardware/user issue, not software.
It's something that hardware manufacturers should be getting yelled at for, but that's not the way consumers think and it's also not an optimal worldview. One of the keys to success in cases like this is to take responsibility rather than placing responsibility. If there's a potential problem with something that you're doing then solving the problem will get you a lot farther than passing the buck. It's not about who's at fault: it's about making things work.
Meanwhile, I'm sort of ambivalent about vsync: Typically I'm all for giving people control over what's going on, but in the case of allowing an end-user to disable vsync I'm a bit iffy since end-users tend to be of the mindset 'faster is better', even in cases where the truth is 'faster is the same or worse'. If your monitor is running at 60hz then a framerate of 5000 isn't going to give you smoother motion. Vsync'ing is a great way to avoid wasted work for the gpu, the cpu and etc. This means background apps/other threads/etc have more CPU time available and it also means you use less electricity, which isn't a huge deal on a PC but certainly can be on portable devices.
Just don't use it to set your framestep, lol.
[quote name='iMalc' timestamp='1356560361' post='5014512']
Think about how much power that little SC2 fix probably saved in Korea alone!
[/quote]
+1 sir, that was pure gold.
