stump@unix.cis.pitt.edu (Robert E Mitchell) (05/30/91)
This is new for me so i hope i don't offend antone. my problem is this. My II si is a nice machine, but slows down considerably under 7.0. I would
like to speed up performance with either a cache card (new for the si) or a video card (24 bit). Since it seems to me as if the performance degradation
is due to on board video, i would assume a video card would be the answer.
I'm just not sure. if video is the answer , which card would be best. Ive
checked out the 24si by RasterOps; is the card only utilized in 24bit mode?
(meaning that when i revert back to 8 bit I'm stuck with onboard vid again)
How about the Apple 8-24? It's not accelerated, but will it do both 8 and
24 on the card. No way i can drop $1200 bucks (educational) on the GC.
Any help would be greatly appreciated, and i will post a summary providing
I even did this right :^)
Thanks to all those in net-land...
Stump.
D
D
D
B
B
B
lemke@radius.com (Steve Lemke) (05/30/91)
stump@unix.cis.pitt.edu (Robert E Mitchell) writes: > My II si is a nice machine, but slows down considerably under 7.0. I would > like to speed up performance with either a cache card (new for the si) or a > video card (24 bit). Since it seems to me as if the performance degradation > is due to on board video, i would assume a video card would be the answer. Maybe and maybe not. Yes, you pay a slight performance penalty for using on- board video, but from what I recall, some things can actually be a little bit faster since the processor doesn't have to go out to the bus to do video. I would say that the only reason to get a video board instead of using on-board video would be if you needed 24-bit video, which, of course, the on-board video can't do. > I'm just not sure. if video is the answer , which card would be best. Ive > checked out the 24si by RasterOps; is the card only utilized in 24bit mode? > (meaning that when i revert back to 8 bit I'm stuck with onboard vid again) No, if you have a video card, your display connects to that card, and it is used for all video modes, not just 24-bit. This also frees up whatever RAM was being used by the on-board video (for 13" display in 8-bit mode it's about 300K of RAM) and lets the system use that RAM as normal system RAM. > How about the Apple 8-24? It's not accelerated, but will it do both 8 and > 24 on the card. No way i can drop $1200 bucks (educational) on the GC. Then how could you afford the RasterOps 24si board? Isn't it priced around a thousand bucks or so? Maybe they have educational pricing - I'm not sure. But anyway, if you're looking for a good (and inexpensive) 24-bit video board, why settle for one that doesn't have acceleration on it (like the 8/24)? If you're getting a video board to speed up your system, then why not REALLY speed it up? Take a look at the Radius DirectColor/GX board. It has 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, and 24 bit modes, and has on-board acceleration at a price that is typically much less than other accelerated 24-bit boards. We also have educational pricing (have your school call (408) 434-1011 if they don't presently carry Radius products). -- ----- Steve Lemke, KC6QDT - Software Engineering, Radius Inc., San Jose ----- ----- Reply to: lemke@radius.com -- U.C. Santa Barbara ECE Class of '89 ----- ----- "I'm not a UNIX wizard, but I play the Postmaster at radius.com." -----
Charlie.Mingo@p4218.f421.n109.z1.FidoNet.Org (Charlie Mingo) (05/31/91)
lemke@radius.com (Steve Lemke) writes: > stump@unix.cis.pitt.edu (Robert E Mitchell) writes: > > > My II si is a nice machine, but slows down considerably under 7.0. I would > > like to speed up performance with either a cache card (new for the si)or a > > video card (24 bit). Since it seems to me as if the performance degradation > > is due to on board video, i would assume a video card would be the answer. > > Maybe and maybe not. Yes, you pay a slight performance penalty for using on- > board video, but from what I recall, some things can actually be a little bit > faster since the processor doesn't have to go out to the bus to do video. I > would say that the only reason to get a video board instead of using on-board > video would be if you needed 24-bit video, which, of course, the on-board > video can't do. No way. My IIci redraws the screen significantly faster using a video card than using on-board. Plus you don't have the video circuitry competing with the CPU to access the SIMMs. (This latter effect is so severe that Apple advised users to put their smaller SIMMs in Bank 1 -- where the video RAM is -- and the larger in Bank 2, so that most of the RAM wouldn't be adversely affected.) I've had great experience with the RasterOps 264 24-bit card (yes, of course, you can run it in lesser depths as well). I suggest checking out if their isn't a IIsi version thereof. * Origin: "Up to a point, Lord Copper" -- Waugh (1:109/421.4218)