I gave this a look and I found an easy improvement as it is now is to increase the node capacity to around 9 or 10. It seems to perform much better than 3. After that it starts to bottleneck somewhere else.

i think switch has HW FPU so doing integer maths or floating points does not show that big a off a difference as it would on systems using softfloat where fixed point math would help in that case (represent floats in integers and do calculation using the integer representations so that your not doing floating point maths but integer maths which is faster) and even if it does not it's got plenty of speed. It's not like your developping for some 200mhz device without floating point unit about 20 years ago i had such problems with gp2x but fixed point maths fixed that. But fuze will probably slow down more from doing lots of small (self written) function calls (depending on use case or when trying todo fixed point math) than doing floating point maths directly

edit: according to wikipedia switch uses tegra chip and ARM Cortex-A57 which has hw FPU

also you can easily time stuff using time() function and do little benchmarks, if you really want to investigate for example time 10000 or even 100000 time doing integer division and then do simiar using floating point division and compare times. Doing a single division will not give accurate results to compare as it completes way too fast to measure

T = Time() Do Some things you want to benchmark Printat(0,0, Time() - t)

Thank you both for your inputs. This means to me I am close to the borders, where the CPU/Interpreter forgives me quick solutions ;-). I think I could get along, if I review my checks, but if I want to get further with more sprites/objects, I will have to review my code and apply optimizations.