marlone93

Why is this advertising-like stuff worth of hackernews?

It means almost an order of magnitude less divisions (and additional calculations as well).

Quake had to do this because it would have been too much especially for a low-end Pentium when it was released in 1996. Yes it is not even noticeable, especially at low res.

Afaik, Quake does not do one divide per pixel, it is in steps of 8 pixels (see dscan.c in winquake). Yes, there is non divide but instead of taking hundreds of cycles, tables and other approximations could be used. Of course, div/vdiv which take only 14 cycles or less are a strong boost on CM4/33.

I think the article says the same. The gba port is impressive.

I guess FPU would not be even required with 120 pix horizontal resolution.

CM33 does in a single cycle even more: 2 16 bits multiplications, addition and accumulation, for instance.

Still it is the first time the "full" Quake was ported in less than 300 kB.

The LCD internal memory is write only and it is used just to hold the image being shown. Unlike the GBA where the video RAM is like a GP RAM, just slower.

Lots of people trying to compare our 10k-year old technology (200 years if we talk about machines, even less if we talk about robots) with something that evolved basically with billions of trial/errors in millions of years.

At this point we should check which animal can travel as fast as a shuttle and go back and forth to the moon.