>In article <Bx9M5D.HvM@news.cso.uiuc.edu> nap42487@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Nishith A. Patel) writes:
>>AND, because of the work involved in going through the driver and processor
>>(and in some cases from the accelerator to the VGA card), instead of just sending out the info, if you are doing something like throwing images out, some
>>coprocessed cards actually slow things way down compared to dumb VGA. Another
>>example, multimedia. say you are doing animation, paging screens. Dumb VGA
>>is going to go way too slow because of ISA, and coprocessed cards wont do any
>>better, with the possibility of doing worse.
>>Let's bring the Amiga back in. It can do certain things faster than ISA
>>computers because it does not have such a huge bottleneck.
>>
>Why is the 7 MHz bus in the Amiga less of a bottleneck than the 8 MHz ISA
>bus?
>Just wondering.
Not that Amiga. The A500 and A2000 use ZorroII, which is about 7 MHz. the A3000
and A4000 (I think) use ZorroIII, which is 25 MHz, 32-bit, the same as the CPU.
