Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[feature] implement multithreaded renderrer #2058

Open
elf-alchemist opened this issue Nov 29, 2024 · 2 comments
Open

[feature] implement multithreaded renderrer #2058

elf-alchemist opened this issue Nov 29, 2024 · 2 comments

Comments

@elf-alchemist
Copy link

Certainly a big ask to make, but I'd like to see Woof able to run with even greater performance, allowing for higher resolution, higher framerate, lower frametime, smoother experience on any WAD's maps of basically any size and complexity. I will understand if the devs deem this out of scope for Woof, but I believe it would be of great value to have great performance without sacrificing the vanilla renderer tricks and the tools and behaviors that were built on top of it, for example, any custom Boom TRANMAP tricks are (and correct me if I'm wrong) effectively useless in truecolor and hardware renderers.

https://doomwiki.org/wiki/Multithreaded_renderer

@rfomin
Copy link
Collaborator

rfomin commented Nov 30, 2024

Yes, we have plans for a multi-threaded renderer, similar to the KEX port or Rum and Raisin Doom.

smoother experience on any WAD's maps of basically any size and complexity.

Multi-threaded renderer improves performance at high resolutions. If WAD is slow at 100% resolution scale (320x200), it won't improve. Just to keep expectations in check.

@elf-alchemist
Copy link
Author

Multi-threaded renderer improves performance at high resolutions. If WAD is slow at 100% resolution scale (320x200), it won't improve. Just to keep expectations in check.

Ah, I see, thank you for the FYI.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants