home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
- Path: sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!pacbell.com!ames!sun-barr!cs.utexas.edu!torn!skule.ecf!giggey
- From: giggey@ecf.toronto.edu (GIGGEY Mike S)
- Subject: Re: Falcon, Falcon who has got a Falcon
- Message-ID: <C1Hnxn.nJ@ecf.toronto.edu>
- Organization: University of Toronto, Engineering Computing Facility
- References: <11809@uqcspe.cs.uq.oz.au> <1993Jan22.162113.13989@bsu-ucs> <1993Jan25.112726.11738@dcs.warwick.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 01:24:57 GMT
- Lines: 20
-
- In article <1993Jan25.112726.11738@dcs.warwick.ac.uk> leo@dcs.warwick.ac.uk (Leo Hendry) writes:
- >In article <1993Jan22.162113.13989@bsu-ucs> 01mbmccabe@leo.bsuvc.bsu.edu writes:
- >>
- >>can someone make a list of typical sorts of programs that would be really
- >>"memory-intensive" so as to really suffer from this 16-bit memory bus?
- >>
- >> -Matt
- >
- >Programs that should be using the blitter, but don't.
- >Eg. copying areas of memory, drawing sprites, scrolling in a window, etc.
- >(The blitter has 32-bit access and is faster at doing this sort of thing
- >anyway).
- >
- >- Leo
-
- Whats so different about the Falcon doing this for graphics when all data
- bus transfers on the PC are done at 16 bits and depending on your setup at
- 8 bits. Not only that, the data transfer speeds are limited on the PC
- further slowing down graphics speed. Plus the PC doesn't have a blitter.
-
-