Re: [AD] Mixer diff #3

[ Thread Index | Date Index | More lists.liballeg.org/allegro-developers Archives ]


I wrote:
I ran it 3 or 4 times, and it shows the same basic times. Quality 0 is about 7ms faster per voice on my machine under test conditions (mixertest.c was compiled with no optimization flags, btw).

This means just resting while a sample is playing is 0.07% less efficient with quality 1 than quality 0 on my machine. Is this worth the extra mixer, especially considering the quality loss with quality 0? Sourceforge has been rather flakey with getting me the AD mails, so I might not have heard everything that was said.

- Kitty Cat




Mail converted by MHonArc 2.6.19+ http://listengine.tuxfamily.org/