Article View: comp.windows.ms
Article #6858Re: Which graphics-adapter is best?`
From: Michael Yip
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 1990 07:56
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 1990 07:56
19 lines
1244 bytes
1244 bytes
Well, I heard that the NEC Graphics Engine is very fast. But from what I understand, Window 3.0 still does almost all the low/high level graphics primitives using the host CPU (80386) on the PC. Although there is a TI30410(sp?) on the Hercule and the NEC board, I am not sure how much is the onboard processor helping Window 3.0. Well, it is faster somehow. However, if you are doing CAD, say AutoCAD, then I think that both boards provide custom drivers that is supposed to run the graphics primitives much faster. Anyhow, the NEC Graphics Engine is a good card, but I would probably buy the Hercule one just to support the American inductrial. ;) -- Mike my@dtg.nsc.com
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1519@berlioz.nsc.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!decwrl!nsc!voder!dtg.nsc.com!myReferences:
<90315.094056MUHRTH@DB0TUI11.BITNET> <1511@frapper.nsc.com> <1990Nov14.030313.16366@watserv1.waterloo.edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!decwrl!nsc!voder!dtg.nsc.com!my From: my@dtg.nsc.com (Michael Yip) Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms Subject: Re: Which graphics-adapter is best?` Message-ID: <1519@berlioz.nsc.com> Date: 14 Nov 90 07:56:25 GMT References: <90315.094056MUHRTH@DB0TUI11.BITNET> <1511@frapper.nsc.com> <1990Nov14.030313.16366@watserv1.waterloo.edu> Reply-To: my@berlioz.UUCP (Michael Yip) Distribution: usa, na Organization: National Semiconductor, Santa Clara Lines: 19