*BSD News Article 6004


Return to BSD News archive

Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Path: sserve!manuel!munnari.oz.au!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!newsserver.pixel.kodak.com!psinntp!psinntp!l5next!scotty
From: scotty@gagetalker.com (Scott Turner)
Subject: Re: public S3 design (Was: Free software and ... Diamond products)
Message-ID: <1992Oct3.055409.17914@gagetalker.com>
Sender: scotty@gagetalker.com
Organization: L5 Computing
References: <BvGoLF.8nn@pix.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 05:54:09 GMT
Lines: 57

In article <BvGoLF.8nn@pix.com> stripes@pix.com (Josh Osborne) writes:
|> In article <BvCyt0.JG4@immd4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> Torsten Duwe  
(duwe@informatik.uni-erlangen.de) writes:
|> [...]
|> >Doesn't performance depend solely on the main (bus/memory/whatever) clock ?
|> >... would be a bad thing if drawing speed was closely coupled to the pixel
|> >clock. 
|> 
|> With normal DRAM (i.e., not VRAM, not duel ported RAM) if the shifter needs
|> to output 65 Mega Pixels per second (assuming 8bits per pixel) 65 Mbyte/sec
|> of bandwidth is used to feed the shifter, which is 65Mb/sec you can't use to
|> transfer data to the DRAM.
|> 
|> [...]
|> >In my opinion local bus is unnecessary if you have an 'intelligent' SVGA to
|> >give complex commands to. Only memory to screen bitblt is an issue but that
|> >should be solved using more video RAM - hope the '928 is able to address  
more
|> >than 1 Meg.
|> 
|> Well please optimise copy plane of pixmaps with xor on and have enough RAM
|> that all of xtanks pixmaps can be resident (I think there is over 1M of them
|> once rotated out, if not I know there is over 500K of them).  [...]
|> 
|> >[...]
|> >>(4) S3 corportation provides a software development kit
|> >Yup! They're very DOS-infected but nice people.
|> 
|> I thought they had a windows bias, the 911 isn't very fast unaccel'ed
|> (isn't as fast as, say, the ET4000), and most DOS programs arn't accel'ed.
|> Not that windows is all theat diffrent from DOS...
Interesting discussion guys, but you're both missing the big advantages to
using something like local buss or an S3/8514 card.

The single biggest thing you need is unbanked access to the video memory.
Next is mouse in hardware. Then comes video refresh rate vs VRAM/DRAM.

Not having to look over your shoulder to make sure you haven't switched
banks or drawn on the cursor make a huge difference in performance. The S3
chip has an on board mouse and having an 8514 interface it has unbanked
access to the video memory.

But massive bandwidth to the memory doesn't always pay off. I've benchmarked
the ATI Graphics Ultra against the ATI GraphicsVantage. The Ultra has over
twice the bandwidth of the Vantage and yet is only 20% faster in the windows
benchmarks.

I did a BLIT port of X11R4 to SysV386 3.2 and using the 82786's on board
mouse hardware almost doubled the speed of the server (using the onboard
drawing engine also gave it a BIG kick in the pants, too bad the damn thing
died, sigh.)

Western digital was shopping around a chip earlier this year that was designed
specifically to speed up X. It pratically ate X straight (like the 82786) and
thus might be an interesting chip to play around with.

Scotty