Andrew wrote:
> Stella flickers considerably less due to its higher frame-rate. That alone
> is incentive for me to consider switching. I'm quite surprised it has a
> higher frame rate - but it does - more than twice as fast, I'd say. Mind
> you, if Z26 supported the blended frames I suggested a few days ago... I'd
> probably stick with it :) PS: OS is XP.
On my rather slow PC (P166) z26 is a lot faster than Stella. But I'm
using Win95, so maybe that's part of your problem. Did you experiment if
-r increases the performance of z26?
The performance difference depends on the games. On games with a lot of
moving objects (e.g. Frogger) Stella looses even more performance. I
guess that's due to the different repaint strategies. While z26 always
updates the whole screen directly, Stella first records all changed
areas and then only updates those parts of the screen.
I think Stella's strategy is more efficient than what z26 is currently
doing, but other parts of z26 are much more optimized, so z26 still wins
the race.
Will there be any changes in the Windows version of z26? IIRC there is a
lot more overhead for graphics access. Stella's strategy might help
here.
Have fun!
Thomas
_______________________________________________________
Thomas Jentzsch | *** Every bit is sacred ! ***
tjentzsch at web dot de |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archives (includes files) at http://www.biglist.com/lists/stella/archives/
Unsub & more at http://www.biglist.com/lists/stella/
