BitBlt And CPU 100%

[Fraile]

Thank fearless   
This lib and inc, if well.

Thank you very much.

[Adamanteus]

As you found - problem in size of image, so compressing only will add MFLOPS to you thread - what will be in such case you could test on GER program example (MT) from my site packing any data over 5 GB. The reason is simple - threads in my archiver make each time more then 1 MFLOPS per thread.  So could work only on machive with plants cooling, and even for me modify packing algo that will fit to limit is quite difficult.

[Fraile]

Hi Adamanteus,

Debugging my program, I have seen several errors:

1 Compressing and size the image.

If the packet too large to send, the "socket", overload the processor and network.

2  Like you said in your previous post, "BitBlt algo making few MFLOPS processing all pixels, so easy could overload processor".

I tried  to changed the image size with function "StretchBlt" and colour, the performance is better.

I managed to reduce the use CPU from 100% to 30%.

But I see another program like "Teamviewer" that the use to CPU is 5%. How is does?.

My program is ready for divide the screen in columns and rows. But the result does not vary much.

I need advices.

[dedndave]

i don't think TeamViewer supports 25 FPS   :P

[Fraile]

I think if you could scale down the image with the function "StretchBlt" and send it.

And when on the other side is received, the image is enlarged, and pixel-level retouching for to view it.

This may be correct?

The first part, this clear. the dificult is the second part.

Understand what I like to do?. (my english is very bad).

Any tips?

Thank you very much.

[dedndave]

BitBlt will normally be a little faster than StretchBlt

either way, you end up with a DIB
you could shrink it considerably by converting it to a JPG or PNG
perhaps even moreso if you converted it to 256 colors and made a GIF