Quote:
|
Originally Posted by StingRay
You have 312 (or was it 313?) raster lines per frame.
|
OK cool. Thanks for confirming.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by StingRay
12 raster lines can make all the difference in the world!
|
In that case all hail me and my expert optimisation!
@ Leffman - nice explanation. Basically it seems to come down that code execution speed is a pretty inexact science due to there being so many factors that can effect the execution time of the same bit of code.
Bearing this in mind, the rasterline timing approach seems to me to be the best way of getting some kind of tangible idea of a routine's execution time. As the rasterline timing is measuring across a routine's complete execution time you're at least getting a better idea of delays introduced by competing DMA access during execution etc. than you'd have if you just added up the cycle times of all the 68k opcodes in the routine.