| Title: | open3d |
| Notice: | Kits on notes 3 and 4; Documents note 223 |
| Moderator: | WRKSYS::COULTER |
| Created: | Wed Dec 09 1992 |
| Last Modified: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
| Last Successful Update: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
| Number of topics: | 1306 |
| Total number of notes: | 5260 |
I've a customer with a lot of AlphaStation 255/233 (with dual head
PBXGB-AAs). They first ran without Open3D installed but eventually
installed the Open3D drivers as a result of note 1844 in the
Alphastation conference.
Now they say that things are "slower" with the 3D drivers loaded. I
know it is easy for them to say this (I'm trying to get them to put a
system back in the pre-Open3D state to compare them). Are there any
reasons why the Open3D drivers could cause the systems to slow down?
They say it is moving windows around with the mouse that is worst.
Jc
| T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1289.1 | Unlikely ... | WRKSYS::COULTER | If this typewriter can't do it, ... | Tue May 13 1997 22:09 | 9 |
What version number of Open3D? There was one release
where shared-memory-put-image was slower, but that
been changed in a later release. But most folks can't
see it. I doubt this is the problem, but you never
know. "Slower" is one of the things we guard against
with each release; none of the 2D benchmarks we publish
has ever dropped by more than 2% or so, even when the
ShMemPutImage dropped.
| |||||
| 1289.2 | COMICS::CORNEJ | What's an Architect? | Wed May 14 1997 05:44 | 7 | |
Thanks.
I'll get them to measure the performance change that they claim to have
seen.
Jc
| |||||