Re: gallium surface still maintained ?
Guillermo Rodriguez <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lib.cairo |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CABDcavZ3R3WXNJz8ZBKvShcwNWDE28Q=tZ+Kfp-WKK+=XQ6zPg@mail.gmail.com> |
Hi Lawrence, 2016-08-03 23:32 GMT+02:00 Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]>: > On Wed, 3 Aug 2016 11:51:57 +0200, Guillermo Rodriguez wrote: > > > 2016-08-03 11:33 GMT+02:00 Lawrence D'Oliveiro > > <[email protected]>: > > > >> For comparison, Macintosh Color QuickDraw was capable of drawing > >> full-colour, full-screen graphics at interactive speeds on a 25MHz > >> Motorola 68040 processor in 1993--within the above limitations. > > > > So did the Commodore Amiga on a 7MHz Motorola 68000 CPU at 1987 :) > > No it didn’t. The best it could manage was “HAM”, which was > sort-of-12-bits-per-pixel, with limitations. > Yes, you are right :) (Later, AGA introduced a modified HAM which was sort-of-18-bits-per-pixel, with the same limitations) When I said “full-colour”, I meant “24 bits per pixel”. > > > Which suggests that there should be no need to go for a "less resource > > intensive" solution with today's CPUs. > > QuickDraw was much less resource-intensive than Cairo. Also much less > sophisticated. Which is why I brought it up. > I know. My point was that if QuickDraw could do that on a 25MHz Motorola 68040, then there's no reason why Cairo shouldn't work just fine with today's embedded CPUs (especially if hardware floating point is available), even if a GPU is not available/not usable. Sure, Cairo is more sophisticated, but the hardware is much more powerful also. Guillermo -- cairo mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cairographics.org/mailman/listinfo/cairo