DRW wrote:execution speed of the update sprites function
That's a couple of extra cycles per tile, multiplied by at most 64 tiles. The loss of efficiency we're talking about is on the order of a couple of scanlines per frame, at worst.
...except this is forgetting forgetting something important: the "efficient" metasprites have
less tiles. Depends on the specific case, but I think there's much potential for metasprites to perform
better than 2x2 arrangements, just by reducing the tile throughput.
The reduced horizontal coverage metasprites allow, also makes a huge visual difference w.r.t. flicker.
DRW wrote:you have to sacrifice ROM space for meta sprites
This, on the other hand, I think is much more significant. This can be very important in an NROM game. Even in my own project with a half megabyte of PRG, I still find space constraints a lot more of a problem than performance constraints.
However, if you have sprites of more than one size, without metasprites you have to write more sprite code, which could easily take up as much space as a pile of metasprite data.
Edit: sorry if this is a little redundant, two others have replied while I was typing.
Sik wrote:What you gain in CHR-ROM tends to make up for what you lose in PRG-ROM, especially since usually the latter is larger than the former.
Very much agree with this. I find space in CHR pages pretty limited, probably one of the most difficult space-packing challenges in NES development trying to fit everything you need at once into 256 tiles.

The tradeoff for PRG space is often worth it.