Return to BSD News archive
Received: by minnie.vk1xwt.ampr.org with NNTP id AA5686 ; Fri, 01 Jan 93 01:52:47 EST Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd Path: sserve!manuel.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!spool.mu.edu!wupost!csus.edu!netcom.com!hasty From: hasty@netcom.com (Amancio Hasty Jr) Subject: Re: S3 question - Amancio, are you there? Message-ID: <1992Dec29.072455.27963@netcom.com> Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest) References: <1992Dec27.081525.29228@netcom.com> <Bzy9wD.9Ez@pix.com> <1992Dec29.053423.3829@grebyn.com> Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 07:24:55 GMT Lines: 33 > >At work I have the Pittsburg Powercomputing X11R4 server running on an >Artist XJS 34020 card. The card has 2M VRAM and 5M program RAM. It's >the fastest thing going, period. I wouldn't trade it for anything >else for running X on a PC; not an S3 928, not a Mach 32. Could you run xbench so we can have an approximate idea of how fast your server and card is? >I would imagine that the fixed function accellerators are doing better >at Windows benchmarks because a Windows video driver doesn't have much >functionality to provide; not like an X server. >-- Also at least on the Jan 93 'Byte benchmark, the 34020 cards were pushing 3 bytes per pixel and on their favor is a 512 byte command queue. Also, I would hope that a $2000 graphics card to be fast is 10 times more expensive that the Actix's graphic card or $200 more than what my entire 486/33Mhz system cost. I am not flaming here just gently want to point out the scales of economics here :-) >Richard Krehbiel richk@grebyn.com >OS/2 2.0 will do for me until AmigaDOS for the 386 comes along... Amancio -- Amancio Hasty | Home: (415) 495-3046 | ftp-site depository of all my work: e-mail hasty@netcom.com | sunvis.rtpnc.epa.gov:/pub/386bsd/incoming