Re: Performance issues

[Steve Baker <sjbaker1@airmail.net>]

Dennis Payne wrote:
> 
> >       If we discard any kind of hardware acceleration, videowise anyways,
> > what performs better? 16bpp or 32bpp ?!? And why?
> 
> I'd imagine 16bpp would be faster due to the smaller amount of data
> to send for updates.  Why do you want to know which one performs
> better without acceleration.

I think that's generally true - but I could imagine some pathalogical
cases where you were doing some kind of math on the colours where the
cost of decoding and repacking R, G and B into a 16 bit word would
wipe out the savings due to having half the amount of bandwidth
everywhere.

...but without any further knowledge of what you are attempting, it's
more likely that 16bpp is the way to go.

-- 
Steve Baker   HomeEmail: <sjbaker1@airmail.net>
              WorkEmail: <sjbaker@link.com>
              HomePage : http://web2.airmail.net/sjbaker1
              Projects : http://plib.sourceforge.net
                         http://tuxaqfh.sourceforge.net
                         http://tuxkart.sourceforge.net
                         http://prettypoly.sourceforge.net
                         http://freeglut.sourceforge.net

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