Re: Performance issues

["Mark Collins" <me@thisisnurgle.org.uk>]

Depends on what the textures/sprites are.

If the graphics are 16bpp, then yes, it's faster. But if you have 24 or
32bpp graphics , the conversion costs may outwiegh the savings from copying
less information to memory.

====
The Infamous Mark 'Nurgle' Collins

'I want to fork you like an animal, I want to `touch` you from the inside
I want to fork you like an animal, my whole codebase is flawed
You get me closer to GNUd'
----- Original Message -----
From: Pierre Phaneuf <pp@ludusdesign.com>
Newsgroups: sunsite.linux.linuxgames
To: <linuxgames@sunsite.dk>
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2001 11:46 PM
Subject: Re: Performance issues


> Achilles wrote:
>
> > If we discard any kind of hardware acceleration,
> > videowise anyways, what performs better? 16bpp or
> > 32bpp ?!? And why?
>
> 16bpp, because there is half the number of bits to move around (in
> memory, to the video card, from disk, etc).
>
> --
> Pierre Phaneuf
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: linuxgames-unsubscribe@sunsite.dk
> For additional commands, e-mail: linuxgames-help@sunsite.dk
>
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: linuxgames-unsubscribe@sunsite.dk
For additional commands, e-mail: linuxgames-help@sunsite.dk