🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <v4it79g@zola.esd.sgi.com> donl@glass.esd.sgi.com (donl mathis) writes:
>|> that the ATI is *AT LEAST* as fast.  Actually, I feel that it's
>|> Funny, I have a SPARCstation 2 on my desk, and my subjective impression is
>faster, but I
>|> didn't want to say that lest nobody believe me...

>Gee, if you had an IRIS on your desk, you'd understand what fast
>graphics really are!  :)
>(By the way, I have an IRIS on my desk at work, and an ATI on my desk
>at home.)

I have an IRIS in my labs and an ATI on my 486, which communicates with
the SGI via X11/SVR4. For X11 stuff, the ATI IS faster than the IRIS--
at least, IRIS programs redirected to my display run faster than on the
IRIS itself. 

However, the SGI isn't optimized for X11. The native mode SGI graphics
are very fast -- 3-D rotations, etc. Those applications won't run on a
generic X11 display, though, and tend to get dropped from most benchmark
suites.

It is interesting that in BYTE a few months back, a Compaq 486/50 with a
Matrox display list processor scored substantially better on CAD
benchmarks than a more expensive IRIS. That suggests to me that SGI just
hasn't gone after the CAD market with any enthusiasm.