Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!daemon
From: tom@mims-iris.waterloo.edu (Tom Haapanen)
Subject: Re: Tseng 4000 questions (FINAL update)
Message-ID: <1991Jan21.123205.262@watserv1.waterloo.edu>
Sender: daemon@watserv1.waterloo.edu
Organization: University of Waterloo, WATMIMS Research Group
References: <1991Jan18.024232.21444@watserv1.waterloo.edu>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 91 12:32:05 GMT
Lines: 27

Tom Haapanen <tom@mims-iris.waterloo.edu> writes:
> OK, so I have upgraded my 3-year-old 8-bit 256K Paradise VGA+ to a 16-bit
> 1MB Tseng 4000 card (aka Orchid ProDesigner II).  Sure, it seems that 
> Windows runs faster, but there are open questions...
>     * I ran the PC Mag benchmarks with both cards (benchg11.zip from cica),
>	using 800x600x16 in 386 Enhanced mode.  The results show the Tseng
>	card as only 3% faster on the average (20% faster on rectangles)! 

All right, two main points:
    1. Several people pointed out that the benchmarks are very processor-
       intensive and even a fast card won't show much improvement.
    2. Mike Schmitt deduced that I was running the card in 8-bit mode
       <blush>.  

I've rerun the benchmarks, and here are the updated performance figures:
	Paradise VGA+ 	8-bit		1.000
	Tseng 4000	8-bit		1.053
	Tseng 4000	16-bit		1.107
The benchmarks usually quoted in PC Mag are only a small subset of
the overall set, and can thus show more dramatic differences.  For
example, Tseng is much faster than Paradise in drawing rectangles,
and 16-bit mode dramatically improves BitBlt times.

The final call?  I'm happy with the Tseng, and a bit more informed!  :)

[ \tom haapanen --- university of waterloo --- tom@mims-iris.waterloo.edu ]
[ "i don't even know what street canada is on"               -- al capone ]
