Документ взят из кэша поисковой машины. Адрес оригинального документа : http://crydee.sai.msu.ru/ftproot/pub/misc/doc/X-perf Дата изменения: Fri Jan 12 14:22:52 1996 Дата индексирования: Sun Apr 10 04:27:04 2016 Кодировка: Поисковые слова: http astrokuban.info astrokuban

From ns.itep.ru!Radio-MSU.net!news.dfn.de!newsjunkie.ans.net!news.rmii.com!usenet Fri Jan 12 14:22:52 1996
Path: ns.itep.ru!Radio-MSU.net!news.dfn.de!newsjunkie.ans.net!news.rmii.com!usenet
From: Jeremy Chatfield
Newsgroups: su.computers.ibm,su.computers.linux,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video,comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: Good 19-21" monitor
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 1996 08:26:07 -0700
Organization: X Inside Inc
Lines: 76
Message-ID: <30F52C0F.113D3BA9@xinside.com>
References: <4d1c3a$gne@nntp.Stanford.EDU>
NNTP-Posting-Host: night.xinside.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0b4 (X11; I; BSD/OS 2.0 i386)
To: Alik
Xref: ns.itep.ru comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video:55549 comp.os.linux.hardware:33043 comp.os.linux.setup:44186 comp.os.linux.x:26935

Alik wrote:
>
> Hello everyone.
>
> I am looking for a good 19-21" monitor/video card
> to run X in 1280x1024 under Linux. I would like a
> refresh rate of at least 80Hz.
>
> Of monitors, two that were recommended to me are:
> Nanao T2-20
> Sony 20SE
>
> Of video cards, I was recommended:
> Stealth 64 Video w/4M
> ATI Mach 64 (Ultra pro?)

The ATiI Graphics Pro Turbo is capable of only 1280x1024@60Hz in 24bpp -
what color depth were you intending to use? There is a new ATI Graphics
Pro Turbo Elite (1600 Series) capable of higher resolutions and refresh
rates. This should be capable of at least 1280x1024@75Hz even in 24bpp,
and higher rates at lower color depth. At the risk of some mouth
frothing net denizen flaming me, I'll mention that we have Beta support
for this (and no adverse comments on the use of this board in the six to
eight weeks that the Beta has been available).

The Stealth 64 Video 3000 series exists as two major board types. The
cheaper Video 3200 (2MB installed, no upgrades) has a 175MHz DAC and the
more expensive 3240 (2MB installed, upgrade to 4MB possible) and 3400
(4MB installed) use the 220MHz DAC. Obviously, with only 2MB you could
only use 8bpp for 1280x1024 (not enough graphics RAM for more than
1152x900 in 15bpp or 15bpp), and you should be able to get a refresh of
at least 75Hz on the 175MHz DAC, more on the 220MHz DAC part.

The Diamond board is based on the S3 968, and there are several similar
boards:

Number 9 Motion 771
STB Velocity 64V
Elsa Winner 2000 Pro (there's a variant of this that can take
8MB for 1600x1200x24bpp)

Other boards with high speed DAC's include the Number 9 Imagine 128 and
the Matrox Millenium. The fastest board that is available, by a rather
long chalk, is the Matrox Millenium, and this too comes with 220MHz and
175MHz DAC's (220 in the end user product, 175 for the OEM board sold to
Gateway and, I think, Compaq, for example). The second fastest is the
Imagine 128, and the S3 968's take third place, just a shade faster than
the Mach64 - the difference is probably not visible to the human
eye/brain in sequential tests, but will be obvious in a side-by-side
comparison or in benchmarks. Again, at the risk of provoking some
flaming, I can only speak for our Server benchmarks. The I-128 under
XFree86 apparently falls somewhere around the performance of a low end
Cirrus logic chipset, or perhaps the Trident 8900. The Millenium is not
supported by XFree86 as anything other than a slow VGA. Despite the
mouth frothing elsewhere, one does have to take Server software into
account when selecting boards for optimum performance.

The real question for me, at least, is can you really tell the
difference between, for example, 75Hz and 80Hz refresh? Long ago I had
a course on Human Ergonomics that indicated a 70Hz refresh (assuming
normal persistence for the phosphors used in commercial monitors) should
be close to the maximum detectable by the normal human eye. At 80Hz,
you should be in the region where changes are indistinguishable to all
but electronic equipment, unless you have extremely short persistence
phosphors in the monitor (this is not likely with standard commercial
monitors). If there's an ergonomics student out there, or a professor,
I'd be happy to learn about the current state of knowledge. Even a URL
for a current research paper would be interesting!

Cheers, JeremyC.
--
Jeremy Chatfield +1 303/298-7478 FAX:+1 303/298-1406
mailto:jdc@xinside.com
X Inside Inc, 1801 Broadway, 17th Floor, Denver, CO 80202
Commercial X Server - for more information please try these services
http://www.xinside.com mailto:info@xinside.com ftp://ftp.xinside.com