Path: 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

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