Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.hardware
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!magnesium.club.cc.cmu.edu!news.sei.cmu.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!doc.ic.ac.uk!uknet!pipex!sunic!celsiustech.se!admin.kth.se!kth.se!hemul.nada.kth.se!d88-jwa
From: d88-jwa@hemul.nada.kth.se (Jon Wtte)
Subject: Re: Whither QuickDraw Performance (across product line)
Message-ID: <1993Apr19.235156.28766@kth.se>
Sender: usenet@kth.se (Usenet)
Nntp-Posting-Host: hemul.nada.kth.se
Organization: Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden
References: <daves-190493121505@129.228.20.182>
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1993 23:51:56 GMT
Lines: 26

In <daves-190493121505@129.228.20.182> daves@xetron.com (Dave Steele) writes:

>The fastest QuickDraw color performing computer Apple makes is the
>(drumroll please) LCIII.  And the Color Classic ranks right up there with
>the Quadra line.  The Centris line pales in comparison.

>Does anybody know the differences in these computers that explains the
>disparity in graphics/processor performance?

I think you are suffering from some alignment or color
table or <whatever> problems, if a Color Classic is as fast
as a Quadra rendering to screen.

What screen card you use does of course matter much (built-in
video is almost always faster than NuBus)

Or you measured "scroll entire screen" where the Color Classic
had a VRAM 10" screen in 4-bit color and the Quadra had a
21" 24-bit screen on NuBus :-)

Cheers,

						/ h+
-- 
 -- Jon W{tte, h+@nada.kth.se, Mac Hacker Deluxe --
   This sig less than 3 lines: Improve the UseNet S/N ratio!
