On Tue, Oct 02, 2001 at 05:39:25PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> With linux, it will say something along the lines of "works with Redhat
> 6.2". (take a look at many CAD packages, for example - they are _not_ very
> graphics intensive). Games are even trickier. I have not bought a single
> Lok
On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 10:47:08AM +0200, Michael Zayats wrote:
> I will present my problem in it's full, may be you will help me:
>
> I am grabbing frames from bt848 and should both store them for future reuse
> and get them on the screen. The box is i810 based and has many other tasks
> to do.
On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 01:32:15AM +0100, Will Newton wrote:
> On Friday 14 Sep 2001 6:58 pm, you wrote:
>
> > I think people need to take a step back and have a think about how much
> > money it costs to support top-class developers like those work/have worked
> > on the DRI. We're talking hund
On Wed, Jun 06, 2001 at 03:28:49AM +1000, Gareth Hughes wrote:
> Digital Z-Man wrote:
> >
> > Well, anyone who wants to, IMO.
>
> In theory, yes. In practice? Not really. Sure, the odd patch is
> submitted, but that's about it. Not much else has come from the "open
> source community"...
H
On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 05:29:29AM +0200, Dieter N?tzel wrote:
> Nathan's tdfx Xv driver patch?
> Still an issue with 1280x1024x24 (x16?) and above.
I apologise for my lack of movement on this. I've had a number of
things crop up lately and I've been strapped for time. I might be
able to do some
On Sun, Apr 01, 2001 at 07:40:40PM +1000, Chris Proctor wrote:
>
> I think these numbers are software rendering. On my machine
> with a Voodoo3 2000 and a dual Pentium Pro 200 I get the following:
>
> DRI:85 fps (monitor rate)
> LIBGL_ALWAYS_INDIRECT: 46 fps
> FX_GL
On Sat, Mar 31, 2001 at 08:33:24PM -0800, Joseph Carter wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 01, 2001 at 04:40:44AM +0200, Kreuzritter2000 wrote:
> > Now i benchmarkt my Voodoo3 2000 PCI card under XFree-DRI with
> > gears.
> >
> > I get 125.623 frames/s.
> >
> > The tdfx driver was branch 3.0, dri-cvs from beg
