Re: [boost] Low-level precision timer proposal

From: Silex (silex0r_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-05-15 14:19:21

> The problem with QueryPerformanceCounter is that QueryPerformanceFrequency
> is not (AFAIK) required to return the same value every time. It may be CPU
> clock based, and a low power CPU can vary its frequency depending on load.

No, "the frequency cannot change while the system is running."
(http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/winui/winui/windowsuserinterface/windowing/timers/timerreference/timerfunctions/queryperformancefrequency.asp)

> FWIW, I have found timeGetTime pretty reliable on Windows as a monotonic
> time provider. It only has 1ms resolution, though.

timeGetTime() is good but QueryPerformanceCounter() has lower
overhead. Their resolution is similar tho.

Philippe