From: dennison@telepath.com
Subject: Re: System Clock update rate of 0.055 milliseconds in DOS/Win95 and Ada.Calendar
Date: 1999/01/11
Date: 1999-01-11T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <77da41$rl8$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 01be3c40$f93dc120$3804fbd1@longslide
In article <01be3c40$f93dc120$3804fbd1@longslide>,
"Craig Garrett" <cgarrett@siscom.net> wrote:
> frequently or on demand? I am sick of having such low resolution. How do
> real-time games such as Quake and flight-sims on PCs running Dos/Win95 get
> around this problem?
My understanding is that such games continually render as fast as they can.
That's why system performance is often measured in Quake or Turok frames
displayed per second.
But then if your system hiccups and a whole second passes between two
displayed Quake frames, nothing horrible will happen (unless you count
getting fraggged as horrible :-) ). If you actually have *hard* performance
deadlines, Windoze is not the OS for you.
T.E.D.
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1999-01-11 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1999-01-10 0:00 System Clock update rate of 0.055 milliseconds in DOS/Win95 and Ada.Calendar Craig Garrett
1999-01-09 0:00 ` Paul Whittington
1999-01-10 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-01-13 0:00 ` dmitry6243
1999-01-13 0:00 ` Tom Moran
1999-01-10 0:00 ` Tom Moran
1999-01-10 0:00 ` Craig Garrett
1999-01-10 0:00 ` Tom Moran
1999-01-11 0:00 ` dennison [this message]
[not found] ` <369A7B97.6AC0CA00@hercii.mar.lmco.com>
1999-01-12 0:00 ` David C. Hoos, Sr.
1999-01-12 0:00 ` Tom Moran
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox