3 ms·
But wouldn't the GPU help if you were mapping e.g. 256x192 virtual pixels to say 1024x768? I.e., each of the pixels from the low-res space being represented by
by greenbit 4y ago
But wouldn't the GPU help if you were mapping e.g. 256x192 virtual pixels to say 1024x768? I.e., each of the pixels from the low-res space being represented by a NxM patch of actual screen pixels, like a Win32 GDI StretchBlt() call.
If you had a frame buffer for the actual screen and you tried to do even a 1 to 2x2 expansion on the CPU's time, that'd have to be a serious speed hit. Presumably GPU hardware can do that sort of thing.
- flohofwoe 4y agoYes, for fancy upscaling or applying pixel shader effects like CRT filters, doing the final pass on the GPU definitely makes sense. This would no longer be a "minimal" library though. Window system composers should also be able to upscale bitmaps on their own though, and nothing prevents them to use the GPU for this.