2D rendering poll results

SDL Development
1

Haven’t received any replies for a while, so here are the current results
of my little 2D rendering poll. (I might post an update if I receive
further replies.)

The replies I got covered 28 machines, although the marks may not
correspond exactly to that number, since some of the replies were a bit
vague. Also, the questions about resolution preference were related to
users rather than machines, so the count differs.

As to bias, most of the data is from machines owned by SDL hackers, but
of the 28 machines, five or so were systems owned by other people, that
could potentially be more like your average PC user/gamer.

Obviously, the first question didn’t result in too interesting data, as
in wasn’t properly formulated.

  1. Considering a very fast scrolling action game, would you prefer:
    a) a fast (>50 fps) and very smooth 640x480 mode?
    ###################### (22 - 92%)

    b) a very fast (>70 fps) 320x240 mode?

    (1 - 4%)

    c) a slow (<30 fps) 640x480 mode?

    (1 - 4%)

Questions 2 and 3 were more useful, though. Here we can see that the vast
majority of machines have 64 bit/32 MB 3D accelerators or better, and 800
MHz or faster CPUs. Pretty decent gaming machines, that is.

  1. What general class of 3D acceleration do you have?
    a) No useful 3D acceleration features on my card.

    (1 - 4%)

    b) 3D not configured, or unsupported on my OS of choice.
    (0 - 0%)

    c) 8 MB VRAM (32 bit accelerator)

    (1 - 4%)

    d) 16 MB VRAM (32 or 64 bit accelerator)

    (3 - 11%)

    e) 32 MB VRAM (64 or 128 bit accelerator)
    ############# (13 - 46%)

    f) 64+ MB VRAM (128+ bit accelerator)
    ########## (10 - 36%)

  2. What general class of CPU are you using?

    a) i386, i486, K4, mc68020, mc68030 or similar.
    (0 - 0%)

    b) Pentium or Pentium MMX, K5, or similar.

    (1 - 4%)

    c) P-II, Celeron or similar, ~400 MHz.

    (3 - 11%)

    d) P-III, Celeron or similar, ~800 MHz
    ############# (13 - 46%)

    e) P-III, Celeron, P4 or similar, >=1.2 GHz
    ########### (11 - 39%)

Finally, we have question 4, which was added later, to replace question

  1. Unfortunately, I got only 6 replies, so this data isn’t very reliable.
    OTOH, several of the replies included comments of the kind “it depends on
    the game”. This is something you’ll basically have to try, to see what
    works best. That said, of the few who replied, most seem to prefer speed
    to resolution when both can’t be had.

  1. If you don’t have working 3D acceleration, would you rather have

    a) very fast (>70 fps) 320x240 graphics, or

    (4 - 67%)

    b) slow (<30 fps) but high quality 640x480 graphics?

    (2 - 33%)

//David Olofson - Programmer, Composer, Open Source Advocate

.- Coming soon from VaporWare Inc…------------------------.
| The Return of Audiality! Real, working software. Really! |
| Real time and off-line synthesis, scripting, MIDI, LGPL…|
-----------------------------------> (Public Release RSN) -' .- M A I A -------------------------------------------------. | The Multimedia Application Integration Architecture |----------------------------> http://www.linuxdj.com/maia -’
— http://olofson.net — http://www.reologica.se —