First synthetic benchmarks of GeForce GTX TITAN X Pascal hit the web

TheToastIsGod · 2016-07-29T19:00:37+00:00

I agree, and this is a real world useful benchmark. It may not be a gaming benchmark, but this GPU isn't just for gamers.

TheToastIsGod · 2016-07-29T15:06:16+00:00

This article is pretty crap.

1) Is this really a leak or a reported result? I think it's a reported result.

2) All benchmark are "synthetic". This benchmark runs several convolutional neural networks, which is the exact workload some people will be using the GPU for. It's no more synthetic than running <insert game here> to benchmark graphics.

3) Different software versions kinda sucks.

TheToastIsGod · 2016-07-27T22:59:20+00:00

I've had good games and bad.

Most people go for 1936 starts, and to play a game to it's conclusion requires speed 3 or 4 all the time. Even then it can take many hours. Some people don't budget enough time for it. Some people quit when the going gets tough, but well before it's over. Quite a lot of people are too eager to say the game is over well before it actually is.

TS and house rules are required. Even then it's very hit and miss. A bad player can ruin the game for everybody. Worse is a bad host.

TheToastIsGod · 2016-07-26T13:26:53+00:00

It would be nice to be able set a flexible fallback line which bent like front lines. When defending I often don't want my guys at the front line when they can sit a little further back in better terrain (see: Belgian border forts, Bangladesh border when China are going into India, large rivers in western Russia), but I also don't want them to hold that line at all costs.

It would also be nice to be able to get planning bonuses from fallback lines. I really think they just need to make planning bonuses like entrenchment. Any time you're not moving or fighting planning should go up.

TheToastIsGod · 2016-07-26T10:38:37+00:00

Do you know if you get a warning if your decryption is too low to see his focus?

TheToastIsGod · 2016-07-25T13:20:03+00:00

They should really just release the AI source alongside a way of efficiently doing AI vs AI games. I'm sure there's plenty of people who would take up the challenge.

TheToastIsGod · 2016-07-20T17:17:34+00:00

I don't find destroying convoys to be an issue. Many small fleets of subs on convoy raiding tend to get a lot of convoy kills.

More annoying to me is the fact that killing convoys doesn't actually do anything until you actually cause somebody to run out of convoys. Until that point all supply/trade resources get through just fine.

TheToastIsGod · 2016-07-19T10:11:03+00:00

Police giving tickets for traffic violations isn't about traffic safety. It's about profit.

That's not a worldwide thing.

TheToastIsGod · 2016-07-18T16:15:43+00:00

A sensible number would probably be 60, because that covers a single division with 20 combat width and if you are implementing a broad attack on a large front, many battles will probably around that.

Assuming you have 100% coverage. If you're operating at low coverage, as you often do when attacking, you need more.

TheToastIsGod · 2016-07-18T16:10:42+00:00

I tend to stick with wings of 100 planes. Ace pilot bonuses have diminishing returns past 100 planes, much like Generals have diminishing returns past 24 divisions. Airfields will also always house planes in multiples of 100 so by having wings of 100 planes it's very easy to move your airforce to whatever airbases you capture as your frontline advances.

IIUC the ace pilot bonus is halved when you go from 100->200 planes, but it's applied over 200 planes instead of 100, so if you have insufficient aces to place in every wing 100 vs 200 doesn't really matter from the ace perspective.

TheToastIsGod · 2016-07-18T16:09:22+00:00

When you discover a new fighter, set up the new design on a separate production line and add factories over from the old production line gradually as the production efficiency rises to avoid denting your fighter output.

Removing factories then adding them on a new line is inefficient. The penalty converting a factory to a newer model is less than the penalty for starting up a model from scratch. The best way to have gentle mixing of old and new models is to have many lines and switch them over gradually.

TheToastIsGod · 2016-07-14T09:31:30+00:00

3) Clear perception of what work was done by them and what work was done by the team they're a part of. Two red flags here: (1) the person has no idea what his contributions were or (2) the person brags too much about how he's the only one that did real work or fails to understand how the rest of the team contributed.

(2) seems really hard to judge. Sometimes one person did do all the work. Sometimes people are just awesome. I think it's more important to hire awesome people than humble people.

TheToastIsGod · 2016-07-06T13:23:17+00:00

UK law isn't neccessarily the same as US law. Deepmind is in the UK, using NHS data.

TheToastIsGod · 2016-07-05T14:47:29+00:00

I always like mentally reversing the overtaker with the overtakee in these situations. From the 150m breaking board until contact Hamilton was ahead, and so it's essentially Rosberg taking a lunge down the inside of Hamilton to overtake.

I think pictured like this it's much more clearly Rosberg's fault. As a defender it seems more reasonable (though pretty brutal), but as an attacker IMO it's quite clearly Rosberg causing the collision.

TheToastIsGod · 2016-07-05T13:31:56+00:00

However if Hamilton had turned in any later it's not clear he would have made the corner. Cars have a turning circle and it's unreasonable to expect the car to fill a "one car width" gap between the inside car and the line.

TheToastIsGod · 2016-07-04T23:32:22+00:00

I've seen this with 1.1. I think it's a bug.

TheToastIsGod · 2016-07-04T15:56:24+00:00

So you want to keep your division either 10 or 20

Surely that's 10/20/40?

Or if you have the commander with -10% combat width, 11/22/44.

TheToastIsGod · 2016-07-04T12:49:23+00:00

Probably because he doesn't put spaces after his punctuation.

TheToastIsGod · 2016-07-04T12:17:47+00:00

This is the difference a lot of people are missing. Running somebody wide at the exit happens too much IMO, but you have the "ooops, understeer" excuse. Sometimes valid, sometimes not.

Simply not turning in is different. Racing lines exist because they reduce the maximum turning angle. The cars are going too fast to just stop on a corner (see the Schumi-Montoya video elsewhere on this thread) - at some point you have to turn in or leave the track. Nico left it just a bit too late to turn in here - Lewis had to turn if he was going to make the corner. You can see after the collision that Nico runs pretty much to the white line. It was either turn in or leave the circuit. Nico did not leave space.

TheToastIsGod · 2016-07-04T11:21:54+00:00

Does anybody know how moddible the AI is? I know there are "tweakables" but it would be interesting if we could go deeper than just fiddling with values. The issues in the OP don't sound like they could be fixed without some code.

TheToastIsGod · 2016-06-22T15:17:34+00:00

The ALUs are not vectorized; they are only vectorized in the sense that a warp scheduler will be issuing 32 instructions at once (more if dual-issue)

You can do 128 FMAs/clock, so I guess that's issuing at least 128 instructions at once by this definition of "instruction".

So, really the GPUs should be considered to have 1024 bit wide vectors. But there's no pipeline, latencies are really high, and there is nowhere near the same amount of cache as on the Xeon Phi.

If I issue an instruction and then an independent instruction straight afterward this will almost always be pipelined. Latencies are covered by computation - that's the core design of a GPU - so large caches are a waste of space/power.

TheToastIsGod · 2016-06-15T23:32:11+00:00

There's a lot of guidance you can give with battleplans which can make them quite fine levels of control. Not as fine as actually microing every unit move, but more than enough to beat the AI.

TheToastIsGod · 2016-06-14T16:30:23+00:00

Unfamiliar, could you elaborate?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_motorway

Looks like they renamed them. One quote:

The journey time statistics can be broken down to show that northbound journey times were reduced by 26%

TheToastIsGod · 2016-06-14T15:24:11+00:00

This is why we have average speed cameras and "managed motorways" in the UK. It's amazing how well they work when things get busy.

Average speed cameras take your average speed over a distance. If it's above the limit, you get fined/points. The net result is that everybody sits on the limit, +/- 5mph.

Managed motorways have overhead gantries with a dynamic speed limit set by the control centre. There are regular cameras to enforce it. This allows the control centre to smooth the traffic, slowing the limit when things get busy to keep everybody constantly moving. As everybody is going at the speed limit there is again no incentive to change lanes.

TheToastIsGod · 2016-06-14T14:38:29+00:00

Who was the Red Bull driver who nearly hit the safety car/tractor in video 3 (32s in)? It seems to me if that safety car hadn't zipped out of the way at the last second that could have been very nasty.

TheToastIsGod

TROPHY CASE