home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: nntp-trd.UNINETT.no!lolsen
- From: lolsen@hsr.no (Lasse Olsen)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.misc,comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
- Subject: Re: Amiga Technology is insulting!!
- Followup-To: comp.sys.amiga.misc,comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
- Date: 3 Apr 1996 18:43:06 GMT
- Organization: UNINETT news service
- Message-ID: <4jugrq$e98@dole.uninett.no>
- References: <1996Mar9.164206.53264@cobra.uni.edu> <DoB0sw.CxI@bton.ac.uk> <4ijt7c$n5c@nyx.cs.du.edu> <4ikvot$777@cloner4.netcom.com> <315206b0.24523121@news.onramp.net> <4jhqrb$as9@dole.uninett.no> <3160b422.34097946@news.onramp.net>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: gorina5.hsr.no
- X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
-
- David Corn (dcorn@paradise.pplnet.com) wrote:
- : On 29 Mar 1996 23:13:47 GMT, lolsen@hsr.no (Lasse Olsen) wrote:
-
- : >: Because the Amiga 3000 has a deinterlace hardware port. The AGA
- : >: Amigas' speed nosedive when put into nonlace 640x400, and it's even
- : >: worse with 256 colors vs, say, 16 or 64.
- : >
- : > Urk David.
- : > On a 640x400/16 NI screen AGA is actually quite swift - even 32.
- : > Performance usually does not start to *nosedive* until the chipram-
- : > bus gets saturated, in 128 and 256 colormodes.
-
- : We'll have to agree to disagree on what determines fast. Perhaps I'm
- : too used to 1024x768 at 65000 colors, but to me, 640x400 @ 16 NI is
- : pretty slow,
-
- Unless you've used some sort of cecium timer I don't see
- how you could've spotted the difference really.
-
- : 64 colors NI is unusably slow,
-
- Almost as unusable as 24-bits on a Mac.
-
- : and 8 bit color is a bad
- : joke with AGA.
-
- Sure.
- Cheers...
-