Simon Roby wrote:
Xv uses the hardware scaling of your video card. For such a smallBTW, I forgot to add: I run a lot of stuff in DGA with -scale 2, and it is _definitely_ faster than xv anytime, as opposed to what you were saying. I guess this proves that different hardware/drivers can do a big difference. "Your mileage may vary" is particulary true here.
increase (i.e. '-scale 2') the setup time for each Xv frame probably
produces no gain. But -scale 2 is just that, a doubling of the pixels.
The Xv Scale is a hardware antialiased scale, so new pixels generated
are smoothed (antialiased) to buggery in both the horizontal and
vartical. Furthermore, after the initial load-time per frame, Xv
takes no further time dependant on the scale size. For example I
can Xv scale to 640x480 and to 1920x1440 (my desktop resoultion) with
no drop in speed, as all the scaling is done by the video card chip.
If your happy with '-scale 2' (btw: maybe try '-ef 1')
great then use it. If you have to scale a large amount then Xv is
the way to go. IMHO, it's worth it even for low-res scaling to
get the anti-aliasing - there's no use having spare CPU cycles... :)
-kt
--
Kingsley Turner,
(mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED])
http://MadDogsBreakfast.com - Travel Tales: The good, bad, and down-right ugly
_______________________________________________
Xmame mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://toybox.twisted.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/xmame
