Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!think!snorkelwacker!spdcc!xylogics!linus!mbunix!ted
From: ted@mbunix.mitre.org (Ede)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.postscript
Subject: Re: Benchmarking PS
Keywords: PostScript speed clones Adobe
Message-ID: <85386@linus.UUCP>
Date: 3 Jan 90 14:52:01 GMT
References: <1755@tfd.UUCP>
Sender: news@linus.UUCP
Reply-To: ted@mbunix.mitre.org (Ede)
Organization: The MITRE Corp. Bedford, MA
Lines: 40

In article <1755@tfd.UUCP> geller@tfd.UUCP (David Geller) writes:
>I'd like to test the performance of the following devices and would
>like to solicit PS code samples, recommendations to perform my task.
>The products I'll be benchmarking are:

>Linotronic L200 RIP 3
>CG 9400 PS
>CG 9600 PS
>Varityper's high-end PS imagesetter
>BirmySetter 300
>Hyphen-based device
>
>Thanks for your help. Of particular interest for me are benchmarking
>pages, tests that can be exercised at the high resolutions of the
>devices tests.

One thing that you may want to cosider when evaulation these printers
is the media marking mechanism.  Some imagesetters use a diode as a
light source, other use an actual laser.  Having a real laser gives you
more flexibility in the media that you can use, and supposedly gives a
sharper image.

We looked at a CG imagesetter, and while it had a laser based engine,
it used a PostScript clone and could not produce output from our test
files.  CG had a device that used Adobe PostScript, it had a
laser-based engine and was not of interest to us.  At the time, we
decided on a L300.  Since then, I believe CG has introduced an
imagesetter with both Adobe PostScript and a laser based engine.

I would suggest including halftone images with your samples.  Output
from various PS printers/clones seem to have more variation in this
area than other areas of PostScript.

Good luck,
ted

|Ted Ede -- ted@mbunix.mitre.org -- The MITRE Corporation -- Burlington Road|
| linus!mbunix!ted -- Bedford MA, 01730 -- Mail Stop B090 -- (617) 271-7465 |
|                   - this line intentionally left blank -                  |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+