On Mon, 7 Feb 2005 00:01:44 +0100, Lourens Veen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sunday 06 February 2005 04:14, Timothy Miller wrote:
> > >
> > > This card will not have the raw power to do gaming of the type you
> > > mention. And it will not be doing the really massive CAD renderings
> > > either. But if you want to talk about demanding 30-60 frames per
> > > second with no lag and frustrating amounts of overdraw, all you have
> > > to do is look at the /primary purpose/ of the card: compositing
> > > numerous overlapping windows. That is pretty much entirely overdraw,
> > > and it unquestionably demands unflinching framerate. Any dip will be
> > > perceived by the user as slow and incompetent graphics. This is going
> > > to be our test, the one we cannot fail.
> >
> > Excellent point. So, if you need to composite 100 windows, each of
> > which is 50% the size of the screen, what is your required pixel rate?
>
> I'm not an expert on X, but isn't the Damage extension supposed to mitigate
> that?
Yes, it will, but by the time this card comes to market Damage will
not be universal.
I haven't thought about this yet, but if we have a 1600x1200 screen at 85 Hz:
100 windows, each 800x1200=960,000 pixels is 96,000,000 pixels each
frame, and that 85 times each second.
8,160,000,000 pixels per second.
In a partially-related note, I would like to point out that the speed
of the card will be dictated by the memory interface. PCI-E is a
little silly considering the bandwidth to our graphics memory. That
will be limiting us to Rage-like performance, not GeForce.
(Have we considered a wider memory interface? I forgot.)
Kent
--
The world before the fall
Delightful is the light of dawn
Noble is the heart of man...
-Cyan Garamonde, Final Fantasy VI
_______________________________________________
Open-graphics mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics
List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
