Author Topic: Full screen 640 x 480 alpha fade between two images (Read 16516 times)

MrP · « **on:** September 07, 2006 »

Well I've almost finished converting my gfx drawing functions into assembly, and by god have I been up and down with it. But in the end its been worth it, the difference in performance is quite staggering really. so here at the moment is my pride and joy a fast full screen 640x480 alpha blend between two images. at the moment this clocks in at a tad over 2.6 millisecs to draw each image on my rig, so in theory at a refresh of 75hz you should be able to do at least four images at once without a hit in framerate. Not sure why coz it'd look stupid but anyways.... Have a look see what you think, and if you could please post back with framerate and some system specs.....

Cheers in advance......

[oversized attachment deleted by admin]

Shockwave · « **Reply #1 on:** September 07, 2006 »

Had you restricted the refresh rate to 75hz? That's what I get and it hardly ever drops to 74.

Looks wicked! Well done.

P4 3Ghz Radeon X300 se.

DrewPee · « **Reply #2 on:** September 07, 2006 »

I get around 73fps and I agree with Sockwave - Wicked - very very smooth.

This was done on my rig at work - Pentium (Dual Core) 2.66Mhz (x2) with 1GB ram and a GF6500 (512Mb) Graphics Card.

DrewPee

Rbz · « **Reply #3 on:** September 07, 2006 »

Very nice, I got 42 FPS (my gfx card doesn't like software rendered pixels)

P4 2.8GHZ 512MB Ram
GeForce 6600GT 128MB VRAM

MrP · « **Reply #4 on:** September 07, 2006 »

Cheers folks thanks for the replies. Getting the feedback i'd hoped for..... Took a lot of time to get that drawing routine working properly.....

@Shockwave - its only limited by initing the screen with a 75hz refresh and using screensync to sync to it. So yes it is limited to 75hz

@Rbraz - Not sure why the performance should be hit like that on your rig mate.... I assume you've had poor pixel performance before due to the content of your post, but still curios as to why its like that...... Cheers for the info.....

Blitz Amateur · « **Reply #5 on:** September 07, 2006 »

I get 29 on my laptop, will run on my good PC soon.

Laptop specs:

1066Mhz PIIIMobile 384Mb SDRAM Intel82830m integrated graphics (48mb)

I am very surprised by that speed, very well done!

Clyde · « **Reply #6 on:** September 07, 2006 »

Welldone 38 fps.

Blitz Amateur · « **Reply #7 on:** September 07, 2006 »

75 FPS on my good PC

2.2GHz AMD Athlon64 1GB DDR SDRAM RADEON X800Pro (PCI-Ex)

Very nice

zawran · « **Reply #8 on:** September 07, 2006 »

Good work, looks like its rather fast, but I cannot see the corner where the fps was shown.

One thing though on a more general note. It would be nice if people had windowed as an option or as a seperate download. Fullscreen in most low resolutions either doesn't work at all, or looks really strange on my widescreen 1900x1200 res monitor. I would actually prefer to watch anything windowed even if it is smaller.

MrP · « **Reply #9 on:** September 08, 2006 »

Thanks all for the replies and details of your rig and stuff. Your feedback is very much appreciated, and thank you also for the kind words. It kinda makes it all worth while if you know what i mean

@zawran - I'll keep in mind about including a windowed version and i'll see if I can update this one. By the way just how close have you got to sit to that screen to read it lol.........

zawran · « **Reply #10 on:** September 08, 2006 »

Not close at all, its a 24 inch monitor

ninogenio · « **Reply #11 on:** September 08, 2006 »

nice one MrP,

41 fps on a geforce4 ti4600 128m , athlon xp2200 256m ddr ram rig.

although i must say ive found out through genarally messing around that freebasic is slow compared too say dev c i remember doing a program that done exactly the same thing as yours in dev c gdi and i was getting about 90fps on this comp.

Shockwave · « **Reply #12 on:** September 10, 2006 »

Mmm. Well as Mr.P is really still getting to grips with ASM, I think we should sit tight and wait for him to discover the optimisations that will no doubt accelerate his stuff even more.
For me it looks cool and seems fast, although how fast it really is is unknown with the refresh rate stuck on 75fps.

Jim · « **Reply #13 on:** September 10, 2006 »

72fps here, P4-3.0, Radeon X1600 AGP. MMX is absolutely designed for this kind of thing, if you're going to look at asm MrP.

Jim

psygate · « **Reply #14 on:** September 10, 2006 »

25 pics on my comp. 1.4 GHz AMD Athlon XP. Dont now the graphic card or anything else, im just happy that the thing keeps running

MrP · « **Reply #15 on:** September 11, 2006 »

OK Results look reasonable all round I think.... Thanks to you all for responding.....

@Shockwave - Yep just about getting to grips but as you say once i get to optimising this stuff a bit better it should be faster still... The routine i wrote to draw images has not been optimised at all, it is as it was when i first got it working, and as you know once you have something working theres generally a way to get it working faster. Also on the frame limiting note, when I get home tonight I'll post a version without the frame limiter so we can see what its up to.....

@Jim - The pixel drawing bit does already use mmx, the routine calculates the alpha for the red green and blue element of each pixel at the same time. However I am still very new to assembly on the pc so there may be a way to implement the mmx stuff more efficiently. I'm sure as I go on i'll pick up more tricks and stuff......

Shockwave · « **Reply #16 on:** September 11, 2006 »

I'll look forward to the de-limited version

I'd love to see how fast it really goes!

MrP · « **Reply #17 on:** September 12, 2006 »

OK Sorry I couldn't post yesterday. Friends Birthday and things got a bit hectic shall we say......

Anyway here as promised is the version with a toggleable frame limiter. Enjoy!!!!!!!

[oversized attachment deleted by admin]

Shockwave · « **Reply #18 on:** September 12, 2006 »

118 FPS

Clyde · « **Reply #19 on:** September 13, 2006 »

69 FPS.