16 bit v 32 bit color

[Desslok]

I have a Raedon 9700 pro and I was wondering if it makes a difference if I run XP Pro in 16 bit v 32 bit color. I remember that it used to make a difference back in the old days, does it still make a difference speed wise?

 

[Reliant]

Originally posted by: Desslok
I have a Raedon 9700 pro and I was wondering if it makes a difference if I run XP Pro in 16 bit v 32 bit color. I remember that it used to make a difference back in the old days, does it still make a difference speed wise?

I doubt it. The new cards are made with 32-bit in mind.

 

[Fuchs]

I concur. I haven't had any problems running everything in 32bit compared to 16. I don't notice any performance hit at all.

 

[Desslok]

Originally posted by: Fuchs
I concur. I haven't had any problems running everything in 32bit compared to 16. I don't notice any performance hit at all.

Thanks guys, that is what I was thinking but just wanted to make sure.

 

[biostud]

You lose a lot of contrast with 16-bit.

 

[Pete]

If you're bandwidth- or RAM-limited, going 16-bit may help some. But drivers and hardware are generally optimized for 32-bit nowadays, and the 9700 has a studly 256-bit memory bus to begin with, so the gains will probably be slight.

I don't think you'll lose contrast, but you may lose detail and color accuracy.

 

[dguy6789]

nowadays, performance wise, it doesnt really matter. But 32bit looks oh so much better then 16 bit in games and high res images.

 

[zephyrprime]

Who cares about 2d performance?

 

[BFG10K]

Always run under 32 bit colour. Everything is optimized for 32 bit colour and additionally, some hardware HSR schemes are diminished/disabled if you run under 16 bit mode.

 

[imported_Phil]

No-one's said that you get alpha-blended icons with 32-bit mode in XP

Blow the icons up (use Tile view) and change between 16-bit and 32-bit. Now look at the edges of the folders. Smooooooth