About 256 or 16 millions colors!

[skato]

Hi all
I know that my question could seem strange but I'll ask anyway : Does MMF2 get slower when 16 millions colors are used then 256 colors?! I know that TGF and MMF 1.5 was but now with the new MMF2's runtime...

Thx!

[skato]

Hi all
I know that my question could seem strange but I'll ask anyway : Does MMF2 get slower when 16 millions colors are used then 256 colors?! I know that TGF and MMF 1.5 was but now with the new MMF2's runtime...

Thx!

[Bruto]

Probably yes since the PC has to read and process bigger files. Not sure if it is noticeable in most cases but 256 colors has a smaller overall size for sure.

[Bruto]

Probably yes since the PC has to read and process bigger files. Not sure if it is noticeable in most cases but 256 colors has a smaller overall size for sure.

[Patrick]

That the .exe filesize gets bigger/smaller is for sure! But i doubt the speed part.. but it makes good sence cause render work should take less memory.

[Patrick]

That the .exe filesize gets bigger/smaller is for sure! But i doubt the speed part.. but it makes good sence cause render work should take less memory.

[Tiles]

16 million colours means much bigger files to handle than with 256 colours. And so it will definitely be slower to load a level. Same counts for speed part. Makes a difference if you redraw a 10k file or a 100k file. Even nowadays with the current hardware. MMF runtime engine is still not the fastest. The price for its genious easy handling.

I wouldn´t use both of them anyway. My personal choice was always high colours. 1/3 smaller than truecolour. And the quality difference to truecolour is nearly not noticeable.

[Tiles]

16 million colours means much bigger files to handle than with 256 colours. And so it will definitely be slower to load a level. Same counts for speed part. Makes a difference if you redraw a 10k file or a 100k file. Even nowadays with the current hardware. MMF runtime engine is still not the fastest. The price for its genious easy handling.

I wouldn´t use both of them anyway. My personal choice was always high colours. 1/3 smaller than truecolour. And the quality difference to truecolour is nearly not noticeable.

[LAJ]

256 mode uses 1 byte per pixel and 16 million uses 3 bytes, so not only will the filesize be bigger but the computer it runs on will need to process more data, which can lead to slow downs if lots is going on. Although modern computers are designed to handle millions of colours, I don't think that MMF2 is hardware accelerated so this benefit can't really be utilised to the full. MMF2 handles graphics more efficiently but I think that 256 will always be the fastest.

32768 colour mode uses 2 bytes, so it's in the middle. 65536 colours (introduced to MMF2) uses 2 bytes as well but more efficiently, and that's the mode that I've started to use.

[LAJ]

256 mode uses 1 byte per pixel and 16 million uses 3 bytes, so not only will the filesize be bigger but the computer it runs on will need to process more data, which can lead to slow downs if lots is going on. Although modern computers are designed to handle millions of colours, I don't think that MMF2 is hardware accelerated so this benefit can't really be utilised to the full. MMF2 handles graphics more efficiently but I think that 256 will always be the fastest.

32768 colour mode uses 2 bytes, so it's in the middle. 65536 colours (introduced to MMF2) uses 2 bytes as well but more efficiently, and that's the mode that I've started to use.