home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ames!sun-barr!lll-winken!snll-arpagw!hwstock
- From: hwstock@snll-arpagw.llnl.gov (stockman harlan w)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
- Subject: Re: ATI Ultra Pro: Good or SUCKS????
- Message-ID: <414@snll-arpagw.llnl.gov>
- Date: 22 Jan 93 20:30:06 GMT
- References: <_ah3djk@rpi.edu> <1993Jan20.174055.23059@VFL.Paramax.COM> <v4it79g@zola.esd.sgi.com>
- Organization: Sandia National Labs, Livermore, CA
- Lines: 25
-
- In article <v4it79g@zola.esd.sgi.com> donl@glass.esd.sgi.com (donl mathis) writes:
- >|> that the ATI is *AT LEAST* as fast. Actually, I feel that it's
- >|> Funny, I have a SPARCstation 2 on my desk, and my subjective impression is
- >faster, but I
- >|> didn't want to say that lest nobody believe me...
-
- >Gee, if you had an IRIS on your desk, you'd understand what fast
- >graphics really are! :)
- >(By the way, I have an IRIS on my desk at work, and an ATI on my desk
- >at home.)
-
- I have an IRIS in my labs and an ATI on my 486, which communicates with
- the SGI via X11/SVR4. For X11 stuff, the ATI IS faster than the IRIS--
- at least, IRIS programs redirected to my display run faster than on the
- IRIS itself.
-
- However, the SGI isn't optimized for X11. The native mode SGI graphics
- are very fast -- 3-D rotations, etc. Those applications won't run on a
- generic X11 display, though, and tend to get dropped from most benchmark
- suites.
-
- It is interesting that in BYTE a few months back, a Compaq 486/50 with a
- Matrox display list processor scored substantially better on CAD
- benchmarks than a more expensive IRIS. That suggests to me that SGI just
- hasn't gone after the CAD market with any enthusiasm.
-