Re: [rtl] RTL performance

[David Schleef]

On Thu, Feb 10, 2000 at 01:07:09PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 10, 2000 at 10:45:35AM -0800, David Schleef wrote:
> > And I hope you never do.  What would I ever do with a VESA data
> > acquisition board?  Hang it up in my obsolete-hardware sculpture I
> > have in my office, I guess.  AGP has no future.
> > 
> > I don't see a real need for 400 MB/sec from a card, when computers
> > can't even currently handle 100 MB/sec from a PCI card.

This comment was in reference to "why manufacturers don't make
AGP boards", not why "AGP boards are bad".  The "AGP has no future"
comment should indicate that I'd be happy to go into a diatribe
about why I dislike AGP, but I digress...




dave...

--- [rtl] ---
To unsubscribe:
echo "unsubscribe rtl" | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] OR
echo "unsubscribe rtl " | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]

For more information on Real-Time Linux see:
http://www.rtlinux.org/~rtlinux/

Re: [rtl] RTL performance

[yodaiken]

On Thu, Feb 10, 2000 at 10:45:35AM -0800, David Schleef wrote:
> And I hope you never do.  What would I ever do with a VESA data
> acquisition board?  Hang it up in my obsolete-hardware sculpture I
> have in my office, I guess.  AGP has no future.
> 
> I don't see a real need for 400 MB/sec from a card, when computers
> can't even currently handle 100 MB/sec from a PCI card.

Lower latency is always good.  The PCI limitations are PCI bus
limitations, not processor/memory limitations.

Note also that putting an RT device on the AGP bus evades problems
caused by PCI bus activity on non-rt devices.