Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!samsung!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!emory!hubcap!ncrcae!PEDEV!rogerson
From: rogerson@PEDEV.Columbia.NCR.COM (Dale Rogerson)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Re: MS-WINDOWS IN 1024x768 RESOLUTION
Message-ID: <2962@PEDEV.Columbia.NCR.COM>
Date: 20 Mar 90 18:41:02 GMT
References: <327@spot.wbst128.xerox.com>
Reply-To: rogerson@PEDEV.Columbia.NCR.COM (Dale Rogerson)
Organization: NCR Corp., Engineering & Manufacturing - Columbia, SC
Lines: 26

In article <327@spot.wbst128.xerox.com> tomer@rainbow.UUCP (Shmuel Tomer) writes:
>I am using an ATI-VGA Wonder card (in a Gateway 386/20 machine, 4MB
>RAM, 65 MB hdd). I have a serious performance problem when using
>Windows (either 286 or 386) in the 1024x768 mode, using the driver
>provided by ATI, revision 1.03. 

>Does anybody experience the same problems, or, better yet, does
>anybody know of a way to improve the situation? Any information will be
>appreciated.

I am using a Zeos 386/25 machine with 4Mb of memory and a Video-7 VRAM card.
I did not notice much difference in speed between the 800x600 mode, the
1024x768 mode, or the normal VGA mode.  The biggest slow down still seems to
be the memory management overhead and not the video board itself.  Most of the
time if a screen takes a while to update it is waiting on the drive
or something else.  It has been a long time since I have run it in normal VGA
mode so I will try it and see how much of a speed difference there is.  I know
that I am not getting any screen updates as slow as 15 seconds.  I also know
that the VRAM is faster than the Hercules Mono card I was using.


Does anyone have any screen update benchmark programs so that we can make sure
that I am not lying about the VRAM preformance?

-----Dale
	Rogerson-----