From: Adam Brown <adambrown1 AT geocities DOT com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: Game loop
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1998 00:41:51 +0200
Organization: IP Worldcom
Message-ID: <35E883AF.3046@geocities.com>
References: <6s2mth$c70$1 AT towncrier DOT cc DOT monash DOT edu DOT au> <35E56969 DOT 8B2E05F3 AT unb DOT ca> <35E606F5 DOT 844DA7A1 AT cartsys DOT com>
Reply-To: adambrown1 AT geocities DOT com
NNTP-Posting-Host: portls84.worldcom.ch
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 23
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Precedence: bulk

Nate Eldredge wrote:
> 
> Endlisnis wrote:
> >
> > Robert Clayton wrote:
> >
> > > I'm using the standard dos timing function to return a time at the
> > > start of my loop and then a time at the end of my loop.
> > >
> > > If not enough time has passed I wait.
> > >
> > > The problem is, one time unit is still too slow.  How can I test in
> > > smaller units?
> >
> > I've included an H file that I made from information gathered here.  It
> > counts the number of clock-cycles used during some routine.  After
> > including it, you can do somethign like this:
> 
> Be aware this will only work on a Pentium; many clones won't.

However, if it does work, it is about 2 zillion times better than
uclock. So is there some way of checking whether you are running on a
pentium?