Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!usc!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu!quiche!becap From: becap@cs.mcgill.ca (Brian CAPSON) Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms Subject: ATI VGA Wonder+ Tests Message-ID: <1991Mar5.035327.6809@cs.mcgill.ca> Date: 5 Mar 91 03:53:27 GMT Sender: news@cs.mcgill.ca (Netnews Administrator) Organization: SOCS, McGill University, Montreal, Canada Lines: 85 Originator: becap@bart Hi fellow netters; It seems that I've got a bit of bad news for those interested in the new ATI VGA Wonder+ Card. When I read the ATI ads that stated the Wonder+ was "faster than VRAM and up to 350% faster than other VGA systems" I was intrigued. As an avid Windows user, when I heard that I could upgrade my current board to the Wonder+, I was even more interested. Luckily I was able to convince a local vendor to let me take home the Wonder+ and try it out. The results I got were not encouraging. I did some benchmark test on both card under identical circumstances both in Windows and in DOS, and some of the results are listed below. The results are in milliseconds (so lower is better), and suggest that not only is the Wonder+ not as fast as they claim, but is in fact SLOWER than the old VGA Wonder! One thing must be mentioned; the Wonder+ card had 256k on it, while th Wonder had 512k on board. This limited the modes available to the Wonder+ for testing, but I don't think effected the speed of the card (I may be wrong, _please_ correct me if I am). The windows tests were done in 386 enhanced mode, displaying 800x600x16 colours. They were done with QEMM's ROM shadowing on, (using ATI's rambios.sys driver had negligible effect on performance over the QEMM shadow) and used the latest drivers availible from ATI (March 1, 1990). Being an avid user of ATI products for quite a while, I am dissapointed with these results, and would ask anyone with an explanation for them to come forward. Otherwise, ATI has alot to answer for in terms of their marketing. Machine: Gateway 2000 '386 20 MHz DOS Mode Performance (PC Mag. Benchmark ver 5.6) Wonder Wonder+ VIDEO PERFORMANCE TESTS: Direct Screen Access 2.74 2.47 Teletype Without Scrolling 0.83 0.82 Teletype With Scrolling 1.93 2.47 ---- ---- 5.5 5.76 Windows (386 enhanced mode) Performance (PC Mag Windows Bench. ver 1.1) Not all test are listed here, but they represent a fair sample. DIALOG BOXES (Show & Destroy) 633.65 780.40 PATTERNS 12% GREY 57.59 76.69 24% GREY 57.66 75.28 36% GREY 57.69 77.00 48% GREY 57.59 76.93 60% GREY 57.69 77.03 72% GREY 57.69 76.97 84% GREY 59.59 77.00 96% GREY 57.69 77.00 Hatch Patterns 55.74 74.49 BITBLT ALIGNMENT Source Aligned Destination Aligned: 32 x 32 0.84 0.97 64 x 64 1.56 2.58 128x128 5.86 9.76 256x256 18.12 32.38 Source Aligned Destination Not Aligned: 32 x 32 3.53 4.01 64 x 64 10.11 11.13 128x128 32.24 34.72 256x256 113.90 128.22 Source Not Aligned Destination Aligned: 32 x 32 3.76 4.28 64 x 64 10.53 11.51 128x128 34.12 37.58 256x256 115.06 128.38 Source Not Aligned Destination Not Aligned: 32 x 32 3.81 4.08 64 x 64 10.71 11.75 128x128 32.48 37.10 256x256 116.14 128.40 Total for all tests done: 3666.85 4210.48 - Brian Capson becap@cs.mcgill.ca McGill University School of Computer Science Montreal, Quebec