Received: from e55.webcom.com (e55.webcom.com [206.2.192.66]) by keeper.albany.net (8.7.5/8.7.5-MZ) with ESMTP id TAA18500 for <DWARNER@ALBANY.NET>; Thu, 21 Mar 1996 19:09:31 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost by e55.webcom.com with SMTP
(1.37.109.15/16.2) id AA036973012; Thu, 21 Mar 1996 16:03:32 -0800
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 16:03:32 -0800
Errors-To: dwarner@ALBANY.NET
Message-Id: <199603211747.JAA13444@di.Vinton.COM>
Errors-To: dwarner@ALBANY.NET
Reply-To: lightwave@garcia.com
Originator: lightwave@garcia.com
Sender: lightwave@garcia.com
Precedence: bulk
From: Stephen Bailey <sbailey@Vinton.COM>
To: lightwave@e55.webcom.com
Subject: Re: LW 4.X or 5.0?
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
Status: RO
X-Status:
At 06:20 AM 3/21/96 -0800, Ken wrote:
>
>
>To add to the cost of the "5.0" upgrade, you may also want to factor in the
>cost of a decent OGL graphics card.
>
>
Under Windows NT, OpenGL apps are very much helped by additional hardware,
but when using the 4MB VRAM S3 card of your choice things work very nicely.
I've tested a couple of cards on an AXP (266 MHZ 21164), and found the 3-4X
refresh speed up not (necessarily) worth the 3-4,000 price tag for the GL card.
Hopefully, the cost will drop and performance will increase.