home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
- Path: sparky!uunet!ukma!darwin.sura.net!haven.umd.edu!wam.umd.edu!usenet
- From: rsrodger@next10csc.wam.umd.edu (Robert Stephen Rodgers)
- Subject: Re: Does VESA Local Bus put a huge strain on a CPU?
- Message-ID: <1992Nov5.212451.20864@wam.umd.edu>
- Sender: usenet@wam.umd.edu (USENET News system)
- Nntp-Posting-Host: next02csc.wam.umd.edu
- Organization: Workstations at Maryland, University of Maryland, College Park
- References: <1992Nov5.172246.1853@mksol.dseg.ti.com>
- Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 21:24:51 GMT
- Lines: 24
-
- In article <1992Nov5.172246.1853@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com
- (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
- > right. EISA isn't the way to go. In fact, under DOS EISA is a waste
- > of money. It's practically impossible to saturate the ISA bus under
- > DOS anyway. Of course, you could always buy an EISA video board (VERY
- > expensive) or get a coprocessed board (so you send it 100k of
- > instructions and it produces a 1M image -- also more expensive than a
- > dumb frame buffer). All local bus does is save you a little money on
- > the add-in cards. What do you do when someone comes up with a better
- > coprocessed board and you're suddenly slower again?
-
-
-
- Maybe you haven't figured it out yet: LB cards _ARE_
- coprocessed. There is _no way_ for EISA to catch up.
-
-
-
-
- --
- /============================rsrodger@wam.umd.emu====================\
- | Snout: O Bottom, thou art chang'd! What do I see on thee? |
- | Bottom: What do you see? You see an ass-head of your own, do you? |
- \NeXTMail accepted here......I'd sell my soul for Offline mail!!!..../!
-