Jean-Christophe Duberga wrote:
benchmarks says we should see what happens when we enable MMX
OOOPS
Enabling MMX support in SDL ( as a recent change in SDL cvs permit again
to compile SDL with assembly MMX routines with gcc4 ) have me shown that
if the MMX blitters are not used is not the f
Matthieu Fertré wrote:
Ok, if you are intersted, I can write a map method to redraw the
map( sky / ground ) of a rectangle area and not all the screen then
with a such method you can apply your patch ?
I think that with SDL it would be *very* easy because Blit function
accept (need) rect
Ok, that is really faster when you don't move but when you move the
camera, the FPS fall down as before... not?
Yes. But I think that the "cache patch" wouldn't impact on performances.
So on critical moments, the game just would works as yet (display
everything).
But ... on 70% of time (at
But we also need a cache for TTF rendering
(eg. keep 200 objects with a algorithm to sort them as "last used", good
algorithms exist).
What will we cache : glyphs or pieces of text ?
That sounds good... Perhaps the fist thing to do - I think - is that
we should find a better way to display
Hi,
Ok, that is really faster when you don't move but when you move the
camera, the FPS fall down as before... not?
Yes. But I think that the "cache patch" wouldn't impact on performances.
So on critical moments, the game just would works as yet (display
everything).
But ... on 70% of t
Victor STINNER a écrit :
Hey,
(Very long email, if you don't have time to read it, go to "PROPOSITION"
at the end)
I would like to improve Wormux speed, because like a friend said to me:
"Worms 1 ran on a 486 [ and Wormux need 2 GHz ]" !!! For sure, Wormux
need too much CPU and memory.
So I w
Le dimanche 20 novembre 2005 à 15:34 +0100, Jean-Christophe Duberga a
écrit :
> What will we cache : glyphs or pieces of text ?
Text rendered in a SDL_Surface*. So one cache item would contains text,
size and color. But we have to check if it's faster to use cache or not,
because sometime it ti
Victor STINNER wrote:
It really goes slower when I use 16 bpp (8 instead of 21 fps). I choosed
*32* bpp in SDL_SetVideoMode. But 0 is maybe better !?
Yes, sure, 0 is the better as the surface will be created with the
current display bpp (i.e. the bpp to which the X server is running)
Hi,
Le dimanche 20 novembre 2005 à 12:25 +0100, Jean-Christophe Duberga a
écrit :
> Agree, but the way we have choosen to write wormux make it impossible to
> be runned on so old hardware :
(...) Yes I know ... I just would like to say, I you wrote, that "we can
do it better" ;-)
> Note: For th
Victor STINNER wrote:
Hey,
(Very long email, if you don't have time to read it, go to "PROPOSITION"
at the end)
I would like to improve Wormux speed, because like a friend said to me:
"Worms 1 ran on a 486 [ and Wormux need 2 GHz ]" !!! For sure, Wormux
need too much CPU and memory.
Agree,
Hey,
(Very long email, if you don't have time to read it, go to "PROPOSITION"
at the end)
I would like to improve Wormux speed, because like a friend said to me:
"Worms 1 ran on a 486 [ and Wormux need 2 GHz ]" !!! For sure, Wormux
need too much CPU and memory.
So I wrote a tool to benchmark Wor
11 matches
Mail list logo
