delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi   search  
Mail Archives: opendos/1997/05/15/22:15:42

From: leathm AT solwarra DOT gbrmpa DOT gov DOT au (Leath Muller)
Message-Id: <199705160212.MAA19215@solwarra.gbrmpa.gov.au>
Subject: Re: OpenDOS graphics drivers
To: pierre AT tycho DOT com
Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 12:12:52 +1000 (EST)
Cc: opendos AT delorie DOT com
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.95.970515025828.6880A-100000@55-174.hy.cgocable.ca> from "Pierre Phaneuf" at May 15, 97 03:12:24 am

> > Ok, first off, if 32 bit isn't that much of an increase, why aren't we
> > all still using 16 bit? :)  I just don't think there is any argument
> > between the advantages/speed etc of 32bit and 16 bit... As for NT, a
 
> Simply because it's easier to have a single 256KB chunk of memory to work
> with, than working with four 64KB chunks to have a 640x480 frame buffer!
> The cool thing about 32-bit protected mode is that you get all the memory
> you need. This doesn't make it *twice* as fast! It makes it *efficient*,
> which sometimes is smaller code (doesn't have to juggle small segments)...

Ok, if 32 bit is more "efficient" then it must be "faster". No?
 
> OpenDOS has *full* access to hardware acceleration. It just isn't used.
> It's not because you don't know how to use the chip on your video card and
> DirectX programmers (those who made the drivers) does that DOS is crappy!
> And when was the last game you saw running at 640x480 in 32 bit color
> depth, all this at 30FPS? DOS Quake with accelerated hardware (yep, it
> DOES use accelerated hardware!) will do about 36FPS with 3dfx chipset at
> 640x480x16. WinQuake runs the low 20's.

In my opinion, if something isn't used, then there is no point in having
it there to start with - Windows by default uses acceleration if it
there... OpenDOS doesn't.  Don't get me wrong, I prefer DOS anyday over
Windows, but at least I know in the game I am writing now, which _requires_
hardware acceleration, that coding under Win32 almost guarantees acceleration
in hardware if it is available - OpenDOS certainly does not.
 
> In action video games, *ANY* overhead is too much overhead. You break the
> cache pipeline. You f**kup your prefetch. You lose CLOCK CYCLES. You know
> John Carmack has created over 20 diffenrent rendering engines for Quake
> during its development? You wouldn't believe what saving a friggin' clock
> cycle in an inner loop can give you in gameplay!

If John Carmack is *so* worried about every cycle in a game, why has he
shifted to Win32 development only?

I'm bored with this thread...

Leathal.

- Raw text -


  webmaster     delorie software   privacy  
  Copyright © 2019   by DJ Delorie     Updated Jul 2019