home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: w350zrz.zrz.TU-Berlin.DE!rawneiha
- From: rawneiha@w350zrz.zrz.TU-Berlin.DE (Philipp Boerker)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer
- Subject: Re: doubling pixels horizontally
- Date: 23 Feb 1996 14:58:53 GMT
- Organization: Technical University Berlin, Germany
- Message-ID: <4gkknd$b1v@brachio.zrz.TU-Berlin.DE>
- References: <4f4ibc$gl9@news.cs.tu-berlin.de> <591.6610T1165T2102@login.eunet.no><1045.6611T753T2256@vip.cybercity.dk><4faoe1$47@sunsystem5.informatik.tu-muenchen.de><2991.6612T1034T625@vip.cybercity.dk><576.6613T1070T1730@login.eunet.no><1257.6614T57T922
- NNTP-Posting-Host: w350zrz.zrz.tu-berlin.de
-
- ludvigp@ifi.uio.no (Ludvig Pedersen) writes:
-
- >>Have you timed the routine and have you compared it to a plain copy?
- >>My routine takes 48c for conversion too, and I do proper pipelining
- >>and still it is not chipmem speed.
- >That means your routine should be just as fast as ours, I guess.
-
- I think, I made an logical error! If the routine takes 8.x c/pixel and it
- converts 3.5 M pixel/second that means that on the paper only 30M c should have
- been spent. Where are the other 20M c? Wasted while waiting for mem? That would
- mean that the routine is pretty free on 25 MHz too! :)
-
- >Your are not using the CPU and the BLITTER at the same time in chipram are
- >you??? Because that is very foolish! :) (read: SLOW!)
-
- No, I don't. I even toggle blitternasty-bit at the importent places...
-
- >Anyway, to make sure I timed it.
-
- >Using a PAL lowres screen with 256 colors, all interrupts off.
-
- >c2p: Used 74 rasterlines on a 160x128 screen
- >Copy: Used 73 rasterlines.
-
- >I consider that as pretty equal.
-
- Inside the error-delta for timings, I'd say.
-
- Greets,
- Phil.
- grond/matrix
-
-