Rendering for the screen is not the bottleneck. Downloading an image
and/or rendering it internally are *far* slower than the on-screen 
rendering. A high-powered graphics card only makes an improvement 
for things like PhotoShop, 3D rendering applications (e.g. CAD), and 
gaming where millions of pixels have to get calculated for every frame
and the frames need to be refreshed frequently. Rendering a static 
graphic image is not accelerated by a better graphics board.

My opinions only; I don't speak for Intel.
Fred Ridder (fred dot ridder at intel dot com)
Intel
Parsippany, NJ



-----Original Message-----
From: framers-bounces+fred.ridder=intel....@lists.frameusers.com
[mailto:framers-bounces+fred.ridder=intel.com at lists.frameusers.com] On
Behalf Of James Dyson
Sent: Monday, November 06, 2006 11:22 AM
To: framers at lists.frameusers.com
Subject: Frame on PC = upgrade the Graphics Card?

Hello all,

Has anyone noticeably improved the rate at which graphics are loaded in
Frame while running on a PC when they upgraded their graphics card? We
are considering doing so here, and I suspect it will make a vast
improvement. Our PCs are pretty current. I don't want to get lost in the
details of hardware configurations etc., but was wondering if anyone had
any success in alleviating the problem

Thanks,
Jim
_______________________________________________

Reply via email to