Yasir, It sounds like you need to direct a lot of that enthusiasm towards learning OpenGL if graphics interest you. To answer your first question, no game has the graphics totally handled by the GPU; CPU time must be spend deciding what to draw and what to update. Off the top my head, the animation system would require CPU power, as would the physics and bot pathfinding. All of these end up computing "positions" of vertices in the model -- does that make them part of the graphics? "Graphics" is such a blanket statement that the only thing it can't be applied to the sound code.
What is handled by the GPU in Quake3 is "rasterization" -- turning polygons into pixels. Various other parts of the graphics pipeline (transform, clipping, culling) are also handled by nearly all GPUs made in the last decade. If you want to better understand this, you need to read about OpenGL 1.4. To answer your last question specifically, to move away from vertex arrays, you must make use of higher OpenGL features, specifically vertex buffer objects. Even that doesn't guarantee immediate performance wins and lower CPU utilization. If you're really determined to reduce the CPU usage, you need to know where the CPU usage is being used the most. Right now, it sounds like you're guessing -- use a profiler and find out where the most gains would be had. Patrick On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 2:11 AM, Yasir I. Al-Dosary - zgzg2020™ < yasiraldos...@yahoo.com> wrote: > Thank you so much for that very quick and great reply! > > * Aren't graphics totally handled by the GPU in ioquake3? > * I would like to max out my Game polygons, how would I test this? > * What is need to rewrite the Game to move away from vertex arrays? > > please forgive my questions if they sound naive. I am very serious about > this! :D > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Evan Goers <megatog...@gmail.com> > > To: Yasir I. Al-Dosary - zgzg2020™ <yasiraldos...@yahoo.com>; Primary > ioquake3 Discussion/Development list <ioquake3@lists.ioquake.org> > > Cc: > > Sent: Monday, June 4, 2012 4:04 PM > > Subject: Re: [ioquake3] How would you utilize additional processing > power in ioquake3 > > > > Moving away from vertex arrays would allow much higher-poly models and > > maps. Currently, it caps out around 30,000 polygons, and then drops > > fps considerably when you meet this "limit". 30,000 polygons is > > practically *nothing* compared to what modern games push. > > > > On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 2:59 AM, Yasir I. Al-Dosary - zgzg2020™ > > <yasiraldos...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> Hi, > >> Let's say if you had the option where ioquake3 would use less CPU time > > as it is now. > >> What additions to the Game would you like to make to take benefit of > this? > >> > >> For example(just an example), > >> The simplest example would be with more CPU power, you can have more > > players; thus more possibilities for more advanced and exciting > Game-modes. > >> > >> Another example, > >> With less CPU requirements, you can port the Game to be a mobile phone > > Game. > >> > >> Big or small, any idea is welcomed! I am looking for people to > brainstorm > > this with me! > >> > >> Any help is appreciated! > >> Yasir > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> ioquake3 mailing list > >> ioquake3@lists.ioquake.org > >> http://lists.ioquake.org/listinfo.cgi/ioquake3-ioquake.org > >> By sending this message I agree to love ioquake3 and libsdl. > > > _______________________________________________ > ioquake3 mailing list > ioquake3@lists.ioquake.org > http://lists.ioquake.org/listinfo.cgi/ioquake3-ioquake.org > By sending this message I agree to love ioquake3 and libsdl. >
_______________________________________________ ioquake3 mailing list ioquake3@lists.ioquake.org http://lists.ioquake.org/listinfo.cgi/ioquake3-ioquake.org By sending this message I agree to love ioquake3 and libsdl.
