Re: OGL and vrml browsers

Vassilis Bourdakis ([email protected])
Thu, 1 Jun 1995 23:27:53 +0000

>
>Take care when evaluating accelerator boards. The number of
>polygons/second does not really matter - check out the pixel fill
>rate, which is a better figure to judge *real* performance. A recent
>hardware OGL board for (NT) PC's has excellent polygon throughput,
>but terrible pixel fill rate for texturing; basically this board, (marketed
>as a texturing engine) will not texture any complex scene without grinding
>to a halt !
>
>=========================
>Steve Ghee ( [email protected] ) <<= NOTE : new email address
>Director of Technology

Steve and everbody,

don't you think it would be a good idea to setup a table similar to the one
presenting file sizes on different 3D formats for the performace of various
PC (NT) accel. cards. They could be compared to some SG ones (like an Indy
an Indigo2 Extreme) and Suns etc..
That way we can have a better idea of what sort of performance to expect
when we are buying all these cards for our Pentium PCs... I've seen a 5 MB
model that I created runing on an Indigo2Extreme very smoothly and nice (no
texture mappings) and the same model would just about load on my P5-66 with
a Viper card and 48MB ram.

Buying an Indy is _NOT_ an option so I'd like to spend some money on a good
accel card (knowing what I'm going to get in advance though) I know that I
should not expect the same performance of an Extreme for a Pentium with a
$500 card, but I'd like to know _HOW_ slower the card I'm buying is...

Cheers

Vassilis

PS I've only seen two cards mentioned -and only one had a UK dealer (that
doesn't even know of the existance of that card- Fujitsu Sapphire 2SX...)
So any brands, pointers models, specs are welcomed