| Subject | : | Panorama |
| Author | : | melf mikaelelf@os2ug.se |
| Date | : | 02 May, 2007 on 09:21 |
| Just a report. I've just installed the Panorama VESA driver on my LG F122PTV, which has a dual core processor. Graphic card is Intel 82945GM. SNAP supports this card in accelarated mode but I've not been able to use widescreen resolutions. With Panorama widescreen works and the speed, as it seems for me, is just slighly slower than SNAP accelerated, performance is very good. |
| Subject | : | Re:Panorama |
| Author | : | rudi |
| Date | : | 02 May, 2007 on 18:25 |
| Could you give some compareable numbers (i.e. Sysbench Graphics- and DIVE test results) for both drivers ? |
| Subject | : | Re:Panorama |
| Author | : | Christian Hennecke |
| Date | : | 02 May, 2007 on 20:21 |
| I have an ATi X800GTO. Playing a video with WarpVision and Panorama (shadow buffer enabled) creates double the CPU load as with SNAP. |
| Subject | : | Re:Panorama |
| Author | : | e-co |
| Date | : | 02 May, 2007 on 21:56 |
| Hello Christian Hennecke Please post report about your testings. PCI.EXE > pci.log, etc. |
| Subject | : | Re:Panorama |
| Author | : | melf mikaelelf@os2ug.se |
| Date | : | 03 May, 2007 on 09:29 |
Hard facts shows that its more slow according to SNAP accelerated than slightly, as was my feeling. I can't interpret those numbers but here they are from Sysbench 0.95: Panorama: SNAP:
I was told at forum.ecomstation.ru that far more important scores for today's applications are: so here are these results: Panorama: BitBit S->S copy 207.728 SNAP: BitBit S->S copy 472.180 /Mikael |
| Subject | : | Re:Panorama |
| Author | : | Christian Hennecke |
| Date | : | 03 May, 2007 on 15:14 |
See the attachment for the pci.log. |
| Subject | : | Re:Panorama |
| Author | : | e-co |
| Date | : | 03 May, 2007 on 16:05 |
empty file ![]() we ask users follow the procedure described in tester.doc |
| Subject | : | Re:Panorama |
| Author | : | Glenn |
| Date | : | 05 May, 2007 on 07:08 |
| BTW with time passing and no additional development, SNAP is losing value. If Scitechsoft wants to sell it, they'd better give it a price decreasing with time or keep improving it by adding support for new adapters... |
| Subject | : | Re:Panorama |
| Author | : | rudi |
| Date | : | 06 May, 2007 on 09:00 |
Not really unexpected. Even though you didn't mention most interresting "video bus bandwidth", the DIVE performance of your system is excellent. However, for movie watching overlay support would still be desirable to have overlay support. I guess Panorama will not offer this feature...
Event though we see the difference, the absolute values suggest that it's quite useable. I guess this is mostly due to the very good overall performance of your system. I wondering, if you get any visible performance degration when scrolling text in a command window...
BitBlt S->S copy : 420.256 Direct Interface to video extensions - |
| Subject | : | Re:Panorama |
| Author | : | rudi |
| Date | : | 06 May, 2007 on 09:05 |
I don't think there is - besides Kendall Benett himself - any person left at Scitech to work on the code. And Kendall made clear, that he has/wants to do other things... |