From: kagenin AT usa DOT net (Kagenin)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: Fixed Point math
Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1999 21:35:41 GMT
Message-ID: <36f4148d.22632282@news.jps.net>
References: <zAeI2.14708$134 DOT 144669 AT tor-nn1 DOT netcom DOT ca> <36F185AB DOT DBB83340 AT devnull DOT com> <36f3a0ae DOT 144798362 AT news DOT snafu DOT de>
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.11/32.235
NNTP-Posting-Host: 208.25.50.45
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: 208.25.50.45
X-Trace: 20 Mar 1999 22:15:42 -0800, 208.25.50.45
Lines: 49
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.63.224.240
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

horst DOT kraemer AT snafu DOT de (Horst Kraemer) was feeling all groovy on Sat,
20 Mar 1999 16:02:21 GMT when they posted 
:
>On Thu, 18 Mar 1999 15:00:59 -0800, Kagenin <kagenin AT devnull DOT com>
>wrote:
>
>> John Carbrey wrote:
>> > 
>> > A friend of mine has informed me that floating point math is faster than
>> > fixed point math in pentiums.
>> > 
>> > He told me that I should use floats not fixed data types.
>> > 
>> > Is this true?
>> > 
>> > Yt,
>> > 
>> > John Carbrey
> 
>> No.  On almost all chips, integer math is faster than floating point. 
>> Plus, you can't use comparison operators on floats and doubles, as well
>> as you increase float underflow errors.
>
>
>You may not be aware of the fact that a floating point multiplication
>is faster than an 32 bit integer division already on a 486. (40 vs. 16
>cycles). and usually faster than a 32 bit integer multiplication.
>
>
>Moreover in fixed point math you have the same rounding errors than in
>floating point math.
>
>fixed point is "out" on Pentiums.
> 
>> Your friend doesn't seem to know what he's talking about.
>
>Check you facts, please.
>
>
>Regards
>Horst
>

Hm...Mighty odd...go figure, eh?

Kagenin

"When the Going gets Weird, the Weird turn Pro"
-Hunter S. Thompson