High range of depths vs small range depth

Does anyone know if there is a difference in performance for using a high amount of depth layers vs a low amount.
Say I have 3 layers, a foreground, middleground and background.
I can set these layers to depth value:

or I can set them to:

Is there any difference in these methods? Does gamemaker skip over unused depths?

Luke Peña

My assumption is that it would be a comparison of numeric values, so the cost of it would be as different as the equation -1 < 0 vs -10 < 0. It seems unreasonable that if you had layers 0 and 1000 that it would check 999 empty layers. You can set depth dynamically (like it top-down angled perspective games) where this would be unsustainable.

So here is a test: make an object that steps from depth 0 infinitely upwards every frame, run in debug mode, and see if the processing time increases over time. I would be willing to bet there is no performance dip as it gets higher, all other things equal.

Luke Peña

if you have layers with depth 0 and 1000, that's 2 layers. There's no other layers (except you manually changed some instance depth, and a temporary layer was created).
Yeah, that's what I figure. A layer is a thing with a numeric depth assigned to it. A layer at depth 1000 does not imply 1000 layers, it implies a single layer with a depth of 1000.

So I guess to put it in the language of the OP: it doesn't "skip over" unused depths. Depth is not a "thing" that can be unused, it's a property. A layer (or an object) is a thing with a property of depth. It's similar to asking if you have an object with an x of 1000, does game maker skip over unused x coordinates; that's just not how it works or what that value means.