home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: news.cac.psu.edu!usenet
- From: jbk4@email.psu.edu (The Prophet)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.graphics
- Subject: Re: fbl or CPUBlit?
- Date: 19 Apr 1996 22:52:37 GMT
- Organization: Cybernetic_Expressions
- Message-ID: <4l95fl$17ns@hearst.cac.psu.edu>
- References: <4l8hl5$qh7@hobbes.compusult.nf.ca>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: nb6ppp228.cac.psu.edu
- Mime-Version: 1.0
- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
- X-NewsSoftware: GRn 2.1 Feb 19, 1994
-
-
- In article <4l8hl5$qh7@hobbes.compusult.nf.ca> mworden@public.compusult.nf.ca (Mark Worden) writes:
- > Can anyone tell me which is better to use, fbl or CPUBlit for speeding up
- > the Amiga's display (supposedly)? I have an A3000/030/25MHz, and I'm
- > wondering if either of these programs can pose any kind of problem,
- > perhaps causing the system to crash at any time, etc.
- >
- > Do they actually make any difference? I've tried each one, and I didn't
- > really notice anything...except my machine seemed to crash more often,
- > but it may have been something else causing that.
- >
- > Thanks.
- >
- > --
- > / Mark Worden mworden@public.compusult.nf.ca \
- > | St. John's, Newfoundland, Canada Member of TEAM AMIGA |
- > | "The smallest good deed is greater than the best good intention." |
- > \ "John Doe: generic tractor the John Deere Co. is coming out with." /
-
- They both speed it up significantly. I don't know which is better. But AIBB
- noted more than subtle changes.
-
- Jaeson K.
- --
- ____ ____ _ _
- ( | \ ( / \ ( ) _ / )
- )| )_ __ / /_ _ __ / __ ( X_)
- ( | /~ \ /\_) /---~/ ) / )/ )/~\ /\_) / _
- )ll/ l/ \__ (/ (/ (_//__// / \__ (___)
- (____________) (___/ (___)
-
- Jaeson Koszarsky Amiga 3000
- ---------------- -----------
- cyberprophet@psu.edu 68040/25Mhz
- jbk4@email.psu.edu 24Megs-ZIP
- OS3.1
-