Slashdot Mirror
Windows 10 Getting a Game Mode That Would Improve Game Performance - Report (gamespot.com)
Microsoft may have plans to improve gaming experience on Windows 10. The speculation comes after long time watcher @h0x0d found a new "gamemode.dll" in the latest Windows 10 developer build, reports GameSpot. The feature appears to allow Windows 10 to adjust CPU and GPU resources when running a game to allocate more power for the game that's running instead of toward any background apps. From the article: The feature will reportedly launch as part of the Creators update and will be enabled for Windows Insider users soon. What's unclear is exactly which games this is compatible with. It's possible it could be limited to only to those downloaded from the Windows Store, or it might be much more far-reaching. We should know more once Windows Insiders testers get their hands on the feature.
Becaus Windows wants all the resources for itself.
Will it also delay Windows Update so that it doesn't download and install packages while I'm multiplayer-gaming?
Oh you can turn it off after you log into the XBox app, don't have an XBox account? Well then I guess you are creating one or hacking the registry to break it so it stops running.
crazy dynamite monkey
Fuck Windows 10 and everything to do with it. Forever....
May the lies we live by make us strong, healthy, happy and wise - Kurt Vonnegut.
Linux doesn't need this because Linux has no games.
Sorry, will never ever use Google Search because, well ya know, just because...
May the lies we live by make us strong, healthy, happy and wise - Kurt Vonnegut.
Next up someone will write a program to keep whatever the current active window is in game mode.
Because whatever the user is interacting with should pretty much always take precedence over what isn't even visible on screen.
Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
...you found a .dll. And you HOPE this is what its for? Ok, cool story bro. ALIENS!!!!
"...whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive...it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it..."
Can we get an option where Game Mode is always on? The user experience should be greatly improved without even running any games.
"Everybody's naked underneath" -- The Doctor
...or that it will be possible to disable it.
Right now, I can play my games, while recording the whole audio/video output, AND record a secondary audio through a third program. All of this without performance issue. I'm fairly certain if MS implement any sort of "better" scheduling for gaming this will not work as well anymore.
Call me a pessimist if you want, but at this point it's more akin to experience.
This is a good step in the right direction. If it is a clean install it may reduce the need for imaging, just join the domain and let the servers push the rest.
Normally Windows runs in an inefficient mode where it prioritizes background tasks, the OS, and other things that are not in the immediate interest of the user, but if a game is running it can now optionally decide to play nice and prioritize the user's chosen activity?
Gee, that's nice. Maybe a little late - I mean, I sort of expected my personal computer to prioritize the f'ing work I'm actually trying to do _at all times_, and I've pretty much done that since I first encountered multitasking back in 1985, but it's still nice.
Does it provide a "pure" environment for just the game? That would be something.
Twinstiq, game news
This takes me back to the days of having a special DR DOS boot disk for each game. Each one was set up to tweak high memory, video parameters, etc. optimally for each game while not loading anything not needed for the game. Part of the fun really.
Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
Microsoft is preparing it's release of Windows 10 Game Mode which has been in testing since 2009 under the code name "Windows 7". Testers have reported that this revolutionary new version of Windows will allow you to control the Windows Update experience, it won't download apps or transmit telemetry in the background, and it will have a menu that's easier to manage.
What background apps? do they mean keylogging spyware^^^Customer Experience Improvement Program? ETL tracing running 24/7 and writing ~1GB to disk per day? Cortana calling home once per hour no matter what? Metro garbage?
all uninstalled/blocked/deleted
https://github.com/W4RH4WK/Deb...
http://win10epicfail.proboards...
https://www.hwinfo.com/misc/Re...
Who logs in to gdm? Not I, said the duck.
APK, serious question: most software I write does work on background threads and the interface thread just waits for updates. Your code seems to put just the GUI thread into "real time mode" which will not help the actual task running on the background threads. Any comments on this?
nice: Runs a command with a modified scheduling priority.
... one of the slashvertisements of today (the only on, up to now)
APK, my friend, the whole point is you can't. The non-deterministic nature of multi-threaded tasks makes any sort of general optimization impossible. I think you know this, since you somewhat allude to it in your post. Any given parallel task can only be made more efficient in parallel through domain specific optimizations. This is why we don't have a magic "parallel" tick box in the compiler options. For anyone else who's reading, and is interested in these kinds of things, it all comes down to how you can partition the work amongst processes/threads and then how much communication has to occur between the threads to get through the workload. Some tasks can be partitioned really easily and benefit trivially from parallel processing. Others (most? ...we need a CS PhD to comment here) show a reasonable trade off between task partitioning and inter-process communications. While others, the "trouble makers" require so much inter-process communications that a parallel task can actually be slower than a linear task.
The whole root cause of this tirade with APK was simply about whether making the current form (on Windows? It wouldn't actually matter) have real-time priority on the CPU would make it run any faster. All I did was point out that most well-written parallel tasks run the actual work-load on background threads, and any attempt to give the current form thread priority would also have to apply the same priority to the entire process and even then, the benefit would be marginal. APK actually agrees with me, since he points out that he tried this and found no benefit, as expected: "& I suggested it as I tried it - no gain"
So I think we're in agreement, which is good, but APK wants to harass me for some reason, possibly for my handle, who knows...Happy New Year everyone!
Hi APK, see my other post. I think we're in agreement, which is cool. Have a happy new year mate, all the best,
NotAPK
It sounds good, but you run the risk of over-optimization, which means your code runs fast on your system, but there is no guarantee that it will do so on any general system. In other words: your users may be seeing worse performance than you are.
"Multithreading you suggest (that I do albeit only on things benefitting concurrent ops) can backfire - how?"
Any one process is not universally aware of the load from other processes on the system. By over-optimizing you have tweaked your code execution to be as fast as possible under the exact same conditions at the time of optimization: this relates to CPU workload, memory bandwidth, memory fragmentation, slower IO to storage, and even bus communications such as streaming 10Gbit/s LAN packets through to memory and/or disk, for example.
All I'm saying is that when that code is executed on a different system under different circumstances you no longer have any claim that your over-optimized solution will run any better. In general, I would argue (from experience, no citations here) that it will run worse.
As such, and as frustrating as it sounds, for a general purpose program, designed to be run on millions (or more) work stations, you are best leaving the OS-interaction tweaks to the OS developers, and focus instead on your application logic.
You're a smart guy APK, though obviously with a few screws loose, and I think you know all this and are probably arguing from the same position.
The only reason I've bothered to reply to you here is in case some young developers are wondering what all the fuss is about and may even learn a little by reading through our argument.
Happy NYE!
"they don't impress me @ all - they're just men too man"
Agree 100%!!!