Mike A. Harris wrote:
>On Wed, 19 Jun 2002, Ray Skoog wrote:
>
>
>
>>Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 22:34:42 -0800
>>From: Ray Skoog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
>>List-Id: General X Discussion <xpert.XFree86.Org>
>>Subject: Re: Re: 10-bits per colour
>>
>>Mike A. Harris wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>ATI Radeon hardware supports 30bit color as well.
>>>
>>>
>>I think you are confused between 32-bit color, AKA 8-bit per channel,
>>and 10-bit per channel color, which perhaps you could call "40 bit" but
>>I think they short-changed the alpha channel so its still 32-bits, or
>>something. If this concerns you, I recommend research. :)
>>
>>
>
>I may indeed be confused by what the person asking for 10 bit per
>channel color is looking for, however the Radeon documentation
>clearly shows 10 bit per color as being supported in hardware as
>10-10-10-2.
>
>Nobody mentioned 10 bit per channel plus 10 bit alpha before. I
>have difficulty seeing how that would easily fit into the
>framebuffer in an efficient manner on any hardware.
>
>My claim of the Radeon supporting 30 bit color stands.
>
>
>
>
I am surprised to hear the Radeon supports this, and I have no reason to
disbelive you, but this makes me wonder what the fuss on the hardware
sites relating to the new Matrox part was about. It certainly sounded
as if 10-bits per channel was a new thing (that was with a 2-bit alpha).
If this is no big deal, then I am curious to know what Matrox has
actually accomplished... (not that I think you need to answer that
question).
-ray skoog
_______________________________________________
Xpert mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xpert
