Re: Differences between RM4 & RM5 boards

New Message Reply Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

Ran Yakir (rany++at++rtset.co.il)
Fri, 23 May 1997 14:31:58 +0300


Rémi Arnaud wrote:

> John Wintle wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > We have just taken delivery of an Onyx RE2 + MCO which has 2 RM5
> boards
> > in it. Could someone tell me the differences between the RM4 and the
> RM5
> > boards.
> >
>
> Lucky you, you now have plenty of Texture memory.
>
> > We also have two other Onyx RE2 + MCO machines that have 4 RM4's in
> each
> > one. What performance differences would we notice between the RM4's
> and
> > RM5's.
> >
> > We will be using the MCO in each case with 3 x 960x680 ++at++60Hz
> windows.
> >
> > Can we use multisampling with these configurations, as initial
> > investigations have indicated that this will only work without MCO
> > enabled.
>
> Same performance, ony much more texture. If I am correct it is
> 64MB instead of 16MB ?

Almost. People who are so comfortable with their 64 MB iRs, and want
more all the time, tend to forget that in the miserable old world of REs
you have only 4MB of texture mem on RM4 and 16MB on RM5.

--
 __                                  | Ran Yakir
 /_)  _  __   \  / _   / o __        | 28 Ben Gurion St.
/ )_ (_(_) )   \/ (_(_/<_(_)(        | Hod Hasharon 54200
              _/                     | Israel
-------------------------------------+--------------------------------
At Home :                            | At Work :
                                     |   RT-SET
  Voice  : +972-9-7489974            |   Voice  : +972-9-9552236
  Fax    : +972-9-7422149            |   Fax    : +972-9-9552239
  E-mail : rany++at++netvision.net.il     |   E-mail : rany++at++rtset.co.il

======================================================================= List Archives, FAQ, FTP: http://www.sgi.com/Technology/Performer/ Submissions: info-performer++at++sgi.com Admin. requests: info-performer-request++at++sgi.com


New Message Reply Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b2 on Mon Aug 10 1998 - 17:55:17 PDT

This message has been cleansed for anti-spam protection. Replace '++at++' in any mail addresses with the '@' symbol.