Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!mit-eddie!media-lab!mit-caf!rajeev
From: rajeev@mit-caf.MIT.EDU (Rajeev Jayavant)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.dec
Subject: Re: X performance on DEC5000
Message-ID: <5282@mit-caf.MIT.EDU>
Date: 24 Oct 90 05:54:58 GMT
References: <5239@mit-caf.MIT.EDU> <1990Oct16.033743.4246@wrl.dec.com>
Reply-To: rajeev@caf.mit.edu
Distribution: na
Organization: Microsystems Technology Laboratories, MIT
Lines: 28

In article <1990Oct16.033743.4246@wrl.dec.com> allen@atd.dec.com (Allen Akin) writes:
>In article <5239@mit-caf.MIT.EDU> rajeev@caf.mit.edu writes:
>>Does anyone out there know how the X performance of a DEC 5000/200CX
>>compares with a 5000/200PX?
>
>In general, the PX is *much* faster (2-3X) for vectors, polygons,
>XCopyArea, and filled primitives where the fill-style meets certain
>requirements 
[text deleted]
>
>A summary comparison of the two options is available by anonymous ftp
>from decwrl.dec.com.  Check out the file pub/DEC/ds5000.graphics.ps.Z.

Thanks for the pointer to the document - there's a lot of good
information in there.  Does the PixelStamp chipset support the X line
drawing primitives or is the 2-3x performance boost only for width=0
lines?  Also, does X have similar guidelines for rendering filled
polygons, and if so, does PixelStamp support those primitives also?
It sure does seem to give a nice performance boost for polygon
rendering....
							Rajeev
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
ARPA: rajeev@caf.mit.edu		        UUCP: ....!mit-eddie!caf!rajeev
"Do they think we can be frightened by men with plastic noses?"  -  Genghis Rex
-- 
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
ARPA: rajeev@caf.mit.edu		        UUCP: ....!mit-eddie!caf!rajeev
"Do they think we can be frightened by men with plastic noses?"  -  Genghis Rex