tjr@cbnewsc.att.com (thomas.j.roberts) (04/23/91)
From article <1991Apr21.210738.10787@unlv.edu>, by whitney@reed.cs.unlv.edu (Lee Whitney): > In article <Qc2tUvu00WAwIy5kMy@andrew.cmu.edu>, kc2x+@andrew.cmu.edu (Kwan-Ju Chen) writes: > ) > ) Can anyone compare the performence of these VGA cards? > ) (Boca, ATI and Paradise) Which runs faster under Window 3.0? > > Comparing the performance of these cards or any SVGA card without > its own processor is like comparing the speed of my Honda Civic with > that of a Ford Escort, or in other words, they are all so slow under > Win3 that WHO CARES about minor speed differences. > If you you really want adequate graphics performance under Win3, > you should consider a board with a graphics co-processor, although they > are still more than $500, it makes windows happen as fast as text mode > in DOS, even at 1024x768 with 256 colors. > [...] I disagree. I use a Diamond SpeedSTAR video card (SVGA, non-interlaced 1024x768, etc.) with a Gateway2000 33 MHz 386 - it is VERY FAST in Windows 3.0. It uses the Tseng Labs ET4000 chip set, and can use 72 Hz vert sync for 640x480 and 800x600 modes (NO FLICKER!). Note that the SpeedSTAR card comes with appropriate fonts so that text is 10-point no matter what resolution you use (640x480, 800x600, 1024x768); icons remain 32x32, and get smaller for higher resolutions, but that is not a serious problem even at 1024x768 on a Sony 1304 14" monitor. Diamond also has a BBS to support their products - A GREAT SERVICE! If this sounds like a recommendation of the SpeedSTAR, it is - I am tremendously impressed with it, and their service (I have no connection to Diamond, other than as a very satisfied customer). I am grateful to Gateway2000 for selecting this card for their systems (I had expected to need to buy another SVGA board to get top-quality features). Tom Roberts att!ihlpl!tjrob TJROB@IHLPL.ATT.COM
pburke@vms.macc.wisc.edu (Peter Burke, MIC, 263-7744) (04/24/91)
In article <1991Apr23.142322.27048@cbnewsc.att.com>, tjr@cbnewsc.att.com (thomas.j.roberts) writes... > >... I use a Diamond SpeedSTAR video card (SVGA, non-interlaced >1024x768, etc.) with a Gateway2000 33 MHz 386 - it is VERY FAST in >Windows 3.0. It uses the Tseng Labs ET4000 chip set, and can use >72 Hz vert sync for 640x480 and 800x600 modes (NO FLICKER!). >Note that the SpeedSTAR card comes with appropriate fonts so that text >is 10-point no matter what resolution you use (640x480, 800x600, 1024x768); >icons remain 32x32, and get smaller for higher resolutions, but that is not >a serious problem even at 1024x768 on a Sony 1304 14" monitor. Diamond also >has a BBS to support their products - A GREAT SERVICE! > >If this sounds like a recommendation of the SpeedSTAR, it is - I am >tremendously impressed with it, and their service (I have no connection >to Diamond, other than as a very satisfied customer). I am grateful to >Gateway2000 for selecting this card for their systems (I had expected >to need to buy another SVGA board to get top-quality features). > I can support this statement. Among the 20 PCs we have in our showroom for campus sales the best video performance is clearly on the (locally built) machine that sports a Diamond Speedstar card. It clearly outperforms IBM's 8514A in the high resolution modes, just as it runs circles around the Prodesigner II. I cannot understand the recent test results in PC Week - all other tests showed that the Speedstar war far better than the competition (even co-processed cards).
hp0p+@andrew.cmu.edu (Hokkun Pang) (04/25/91)
The lastest issue of Info give SpeedStar a pretty low rating (7.2??). It also says that it *is not* the fastest! but with so many loyal users in the Net, i wonder if Info has some sort of conspiracy on this! :-)
indra@brahms.amd.com (Indra Singhal) (04/29/91)
hp0p+@andrew.cmu.edu (Hokkun Pang) writes: >The lastest issue of Info give SpeedStar a pretty low rating (7.2??). >It also says that it *is not* the fastest! but with so many loyal users in >the Net, i wonder if Info has some sort of conspiracy on this! :-) I am using a SpeedStar and I wondered about the rating in Info World. I called Diamond and gave them the bad news... nonetheless, look at the benchmarks that INFO reports... they are basing their speed ratings primarily on Autocad benchmarks. On the Windows benchmarks they use applications like Excel and PowerPoint... those numbers are all within a margin of error. I have personally compared Trident and the Speedstar using the PC Mag benchmarks... the Speedstar beats it HOLLOW! -- iNDRA | indra@amd.com or {ames apple uunet}!amd!indra | (Indra Singhal) (408) 749-5445; Advanced Micro Devices | MS 167; Box 3453; 901, Thompson Pl., Sunnyvale, CA 94088
hp0p+@andrew.cmu.edu (Hokkun Pang) (04/29/91)
don't know if someone else pointed this out already. i called Gateway and they said SpeedStar is about 30% faster than ATI Wonder.