Dietmar Schultz wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 06, 2001 at 01:50:50AM -0600, Dr. Aldo Medina wrote: > > [...] > > (--) NVIDIA(0): Chipset: "RIVA TNT" > > (**) NVIDIA(0): Depth 24, (--) framebuffer bpp 32 > > (==) NVIDIA(0): RGB weight 888 > > (==) NVIDIA(0): Default visual is TrueColor > [...] > > (--) NVIDIA(0): Virtual size is 1600x1200 (pitch 1600) > > (**) NVIDIA(0): Default mode "1600x1200": 202.5 MHz, 93.8 kHz, 75.0 Hz > > (**) NVIDIA(0): Default mode "1280x1024": 157.5 MHz, 91.1 kHz, 85.0 Hz > > (**) NVIDIA(0): Default mode "1024x768": 94.5 MHz, 68.7 kHz, 85.0 Hz > > (**) NVIDIA(0): Default mode "800x600": 56.3 MHz, 53.7 kHz, 85.1 Hz > > (**) NVIDIA(0): Default mode "640x400": 31.5 MHz, 37.9 kHz, 85.1 Hz > > (II) NVIDIA(0): Applying EDID constraints on remaining valid modes. > > (II) NVIDIA(0): Virtual Screen size determined to be 1600 x 1200 > > (++) NVIDIA(0): DPI set to (100, 100) > [...] > > I remember, my brother has a Diamond card based on Riva-TNT chip. He > also uses a resloution of 1600x1200 at 32bpp, he don't use 3D things, > not even GL-screensavers. But I had tried that and it was painfully > slow. Switching back to 1024x786 and 16bpp and speed was fine. I > thought 3D on this high resolution and colour depth was to much to > handle for this card. > > Btw, the screensavers running in a small window were fine, tuxracer in > a window of 640x480 was playable, too. About 16-20 fps, iirc. The > larger the tuxracer window was, the poorer the speed was. > > Me, having a Geforce2, don't see such problems. Unless I turn full > screen antialiasing on... > > -- > Bye, > Dietmar
The funny thing is that "hardware" acceleration is about 2-3 times slower than "software". Thanks any way, as I seem to remember something in my previous machine (PII350, RH 6.2) about recommending using 16-bit mode, as this is the accelerated bpp. I will try it and post the results. Thank you very much. _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
