From: frenchc AT cadvision DOT com (Calvin French)
Newsgroups: alt.msdos.programmer,comp.os.msdos.djgpp,rec.games.programmer
Subject: Re: 640x480 or 320x200?
Date: 17 May 1997 16:37:46 GMT
Organization: Reham Salad
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <5lkmsq$2hkk@elmo.cadvision.com>
References: <01bc6120$d9fcc380$82a42499 AT syntaxlogic DOT earthlink DOT net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ts52ip109.cadvision.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=US-ASCII
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Precedence: bulk

In article <01bc6120$d9fcc380$82a42499 AT syntaxlogic DOT earthlink DOT net>, 
syntaxlogic AT earthlink DOT net says...

>Has anyone developed an action game in 640x480 with allegro?  I'd like to
>test the speed at that resolution as compared to the common 320x200. 
>Please send me a zipped executable of the game.

Well I can't send you a zip, but I can tell you what I've discovered. I'm 
making an action-RPG which runs in two resolutions (graphics are scaled down 
at runtime if need be) both 640x480x256 and 320x240x256. On my slow 486SX/25 
the the low rez runs about 4 or 5 times as fast, and the high res is not 
really playable. But this is a slow computer, and I'm doing a lot of drawing 
(completely refresh screen every frame, no dirty rectangles or whatnot) On a 
fast computer, I really can't see hirez being much of a problem, and it 
looks a lot better.

- Calvin -