Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!njin!uupsi!sunic!news.funet.fi!hydra!cc.helsinki.fi!osmoviita
From: osmoviita@cc.helsinki.fi
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Subject: Re: Caching and VGA (was: Comparing 486 to 386 Systems)
Message-ID: <1991Apr20.224804.6066@cc.helsinki.fi>
Date: 20 Apr 91 22:48:04 GMT
References: <1991Apr6.045408.15395@agate.berkeley.edu>  <1991Apr18.192814.21504@amd.com>
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 15

In article <1991Apr18.192814.21504@amd.com>, phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) writes:
> osmoviita@cc.helsinki.fi writes:
>>How does VGA (SuperVGA) etc. suffer from caching? 
> 
> If you cache writes, then the cache grabs the write and
> the VGA card doesn't get it.

Have You experienced real problems or is this theoretical thinking? I have
not heard before of any such problems, and not seen them myself. Could You
explain more in detail. I wouldn't mind not to write same value to same
pixel if it is already there. But do You mean that if same places of
different pages are written after each other the cache won't let the data
through? Or what??

Kari Osmoviita			osmoviita@cc.helsinki.fi