Re: Performance

Hi Kevin,

Its been a while since I bought any graphics machines
or cards, but what you are seeing is consistent with
my experience: NVidia is better than most.

Good luck,
Bill

On Tue, 27 Apr 2004, Kevin Manross wrote:

>
> Greetings,
>
> I have a question about performance and responsiveness that I'm not sure
> if it is a Java3D question or a VisAD question.
>
> I have found that running my application on different computers with
> different hardware (specifically graphics cards) results in varied
> resposiveness to mouse inputs (DirectManipulationRendererJ3d is mainly
> used on a DisplayImplJ3D).
>
> 1) I have great response on my development computer running
>
> - nVidia chip (? video RAM)
> - 2.0 GHz processor (P4)
> - 1.4 Gb RAM
>
> 2) Lousy responsiveness with:
>
> - Matrox chip (? video RAM)
> - 2.0 GHz processor (P4)
> - 2 Gb RAM
>
> 3) Somewhat slower than 1) but much faster than 2) with
>
> - nVidia chip (32 Mb video RAM)
> - 700 MHz processor (P3)
> - 64 Mb RAM
>
> 4) Lousy performance with:
>
> - ATI Rage Mobility (8 Mb video RAM)
> - 700 MHz processor (P3)
> - 128 Mb RAM
>
> To me it is obvious that the nVidia chip has the greatest
> responsiveness.  My questions are:
>
> Do most graphics cards do a decent job of rendering?
>
> Have I simply not found the right drivers for the cards I'm having
> trouble with?
>
> Is it better to use hardware (drivers) accelleration over software (DRI)
> rendering whenever possible?
>
> And finally, has anyone had success running VisAD effectively
> (performance-wise) on a Matrox G450?
>
> Many thanks!!
>
> -kevin.
>
> --
> +------------------------------------------------------------+
> Kevin L. Manross      [KD5MYD] <><           (405)-366-0557
> CIMMS Research Associate               kevin.manross@xxxxxxxx
> [NSSL-WRDD/SWATN]         http://www.cimms.ou.edu/~kmanross
>
> "My opinions are my own and not representative of CIMMS, NSSL,
>   NOAA or any affiliates"
> +------------------------------------------------------------+
>
>