From:	Vic <tudor AT cam DOT org>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: Allegro graphics speed: 16 bit vs. 8 bit
Date:	Sat, 06 Dec 1997 20:40:21 -0500
Organization:	Communications Accessibles Montreal, Quebec Canada
Lines:	16
Message-ID:	<3489FE85.83A@cam.org>
References:	<34883de8 DOT 0 AT news DOT itsnet DOT com> <iiyrMDA2yXi0EwPx AT talula DOT demon DOT co DOT uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	dynamicppp-234.hip.cam.org
Mime-Version:	1.0
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

Shawn Hargreaves wrote:
> >Sorry I haven't just run at test, but I am wondering if anyone has a
> >quick answer before I spend a couple hours downloading, installing, and
> >writing new code for the next addition of Allegro
of course the code will get slower and slower when you increase
resolution and/or color depth. You want numbers?
well, I have this stupid 640x480x15bit app. The drawing on the buffer
time is irrelevant, since it is fast enough not to interfere with the
frame rate. Using a brute force approach (drawing everything then
blitting) I get 22 FPS on a P133. In 8 bit I get 50. Of course the app
looks horrible in 8 bit. Although you could make it faster. using a more
clever approach now I get around 40-50 FPS. But I don't really "draw"
every frame :) unless the screen changes,I just update the rest of the
program stuff.
-- 
--> http://www.cam.org/~tudor <--

- Raw text -