"In the April 23rd article, I believe they were testing the Diamond GT drivers. Which had a reputation of being slow and needed further optimization."
Are you backing away from your position that Diamond's drivers are
far faster than those of #9, Hercules, STB, etc.?
"GT" is the name given to Diamond's accelerated "object-oriented" driver core. On a Diamond S3 board, one's options are the basic S3 drivers, or the Diamond-developed GT driver. I wouldn't classify
the GT driver as being terribly slow (they had some problems early
out, but this is typical); my point is that they're not much different than any other given first-tier S3 house's accelerated drivers.
Interesting tidbit: Diamond spent US $1M on their GT drivers, more than STB and #9 spent combined. Diamond's drivers and InControl 95 tool sets are pretty nice, but I think it got to the point of diminishing returns!
"Diamond, #9, and Hercules have to optimize whatever drivers are given to them by the OEM chip manufacturers."
FWIW, the Diamond GT drivers and the Hercules Power Drivers have essentially zero original S3 code...perhaps some mode setup and decimation stuff is intact. They're not so much optimized drivers as new-from-the-ground-up efforts. I don't know about #9.
"Your arguments do not convince me that you have any more knowledge regarding the graphics industry than I do. So I'll enjoy eating my omelette, dancing to the Macarena, AND rest assured that I understand the graphics industry that I have followed for years."
I'll take your word fot it. Words to the wise, however: ceasing from disemenating incorrect information (for instance, your statement that Diamond could not develop custom display drivers until DirectX was released; it only takes somebody marginally familiar with Windows 95 architecture to understand that this is not the case) will help your reputation as an expert. It is incumbent on intelligent people like yourself to avoid the temptation of deliberately spreading disinformation.
Rolf |
