home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!pacbell.com!decwrl!netsys!news!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!caen!spool.mu.edu!yale.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!cs.utexas.edu!hermes.chpc.utexas.edu!news.utdallas.edu!goyal
- From: goyal@utdallas.edu (Mohit K. Goyal)
- Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
- Subject: Re: Does VESA Local Bus put a huge strain on a CPU?
- Message-ID: <1992Nov6.033805.27952@utdallas.edu>
- Date: 6 Nov 92 03:38:05 GMT
- References: <1992Nov5.172246.1853@mksol.dseg.ti.com> <1992Nov5.212451.20864@wam.umd.edu> <1992Nov5.230528.15051@mksol.dseg.ti.com>
- Sender: usenet@utdallas.edu
- Organization: Univ. of Texas at Dallas
- Lines: 22
- Nntp-Posting-Host: csclass.utdallas.edu
-
- >> Maybe you haven't figured it out yet: LB cards _ARE_
- >> coprocessed. There is _no way_ for EISA to catch up.
- >
- >Maybe you haven't figured it out yet, but LB cards are mostly not
- >coprocessed. They're things like ET-4000 framebuffer cards.
- >Coprocessing doesn't buy you much on local bus, since the 'win' for
- >local bus is being able to move huge amounts of data between two
- >points quickly. If you're coprocessed, you don't need that capability
- >for your video.
- >
- Correct. Though putting a coprocessed(accelerated) video board on a
- vl-bus slot will give *some* improvement, just not nearly as much as
- moving a ET4000 card from ISA to vl-bus. Why? That's obvious, what
- ever data that is being moved, is being faster.
-
- Of course, this is where "value" comes into question. If you buy an
- ISA system and get an ATI Ultra Pro that give you a 25million winmark,
- and someone else pays $500 more for a system with a vl-bus and a vl-bus
- ATI Ultra Pro that gets 30million winmarks, which is better?
-
- Video drivers also play a *very* important part, espescially on true
- coprocessed cards, but on accelerated ones as well.
-