| delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
| From: | "Jean-Réginald Louis" <louis DOT jean-reginald AT teccart DOT qc DOT ca> |
| Newsgroups: | comp.os.msdos.djgpp |
| Subject: | Re: fixed or float 3D calculations on a pentium? |
| Date: | Wed, 07 Jan 1998 13:20:06 -0500 |
| Organization: | VTL |
| Lines: | 14 |
| Message-ID: | <34B3C754.C88EAC39@teccart.qc.ca> |
| References: | <34B3DEDD DOT F04C448C AT laon DOT inra DOT fr> |
| NNTP-Posting-Host: | ppp112.101.mmtl.videotron.net |
| Mime-Version: | 1.0 |
| To: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com |
| DJ-Gateway: | from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp |
Victor jetten wrote: > I've been doing some 3D landscape respresentations using Allegro on a > pentium 166, resolution 1024x768 with 256 colors. The fixed point > version is slower than in floating point version (basic 3D calculations > on gridcells). Is this because a pertium is faster in float ? How or > when should fixed point be applied to make it faster? Thanks Personnaly, I prefer using float, there are very more accurate than fixed (particulary in matrices). A lot of people said that floating math are faster on Pentium than fixed. I just repeat what I read. :-)
| webmaster | delorie software privacy |
| Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |