Interesting... Now I am happy not to have switched to CosmoX as I almost decided a while ago. I'll stick to DirectQB.
It is an interesting idea, we could do those benchmarks with all the libraries.
Er, it's just TriG that's faster. Not the rest of the lib. And neither is fast anyway, UGL works in rgb, meaning that it has do more then 3 times the work for each pixel. And it's still faster then both of them, this shows how much both of them sucks. An 8 bit goruad shader which expects a linear palette should runs 3-4 times the speed of either of them. And about comparing all the libs, eric did that a long time ago.
http://hyperion.cc.uregina.ca/~cowles1e/gfxlib/
in every other speed comparison i've seen before of dqb and cosmox, cosmox is 2-4 times faster in just about everything. maybe try a test of just the drawing routines for both and not include rotation and the results may be different. and blitz is right, ugl is faster than all of them, though it's a little more rigid in turn.
Quote:Interesting... Now I am happy not to have switched to CosmoX as I almost decided a while ago. I'll stick to DirectQB.
It is an interesting idea, we could do those benchmarks with all the libraries.
Huh???
I did the benchmarks on the Sprite routines and CosmoX beats all the LIB(including Mine and UGL) in transparent put. Just about a 100 /sec on a 486. Though Solidly, its a lil slow...
And if your gonna use DQB for your 3d games better use UGL or DQB7.1.
I am a little bit outdated... Where are your benchmarks? I'd like to check...
What's Directqb7.1? AFAIK, last version was 1.6.4 ... ...
well, for 2d, cosmox is definately faster. i remember rel posting his benchmarks for the libs on a 486 and he got 8,000 for dqb and something like 32,000 for cosmox... or something.
i'm interested to see bobby's take on this...
Yeah, I'd like to see his reaction
Quote:Who's Bobby?
Bobby is the guy who wrote CosmoX. He hangs around Piptol's site.
And the last version of DQB was 1.6(2?) but Wisdomdude(and others?) released a modified version, 1.7.