Oxygen

[Eric Camper]

<<< Message <7v2dnd$56...@adesknews2.autodesk.com> was originally posted to 'autodesk.aec.arch-desktop2' on Mon, 25 Oct 1999 16:13:45 -0400.>>>

I am purchasing a new computer here soon and
I am getting the Oxygen GMX 96 RAM. I have
the Elsa Gloria II 8 RAM now. Can anyone tell
me from experience on the difference in these cards
as far as how much time is saved.

For instance, If it takes me 5 hours to render something now
How long will it take me after I upgrade. Should it be 8 times
faster?

Thanx

--
Eric Camper
Computer Graphics Designer
Davis, Bowen & Friedel
One Plaza East Suite 200
Salisbury, Maryland 21801
410-543-9091
b...@dbfinc.com

[Nauman M]

<<< Message <3814BE11...@email.com> was originally posted to 'autodesk.aec.arch-desktop2' on Mon, 25 Oct 1999 16:31:13 -0400.>>>

Check the Cadalyst or Cadence (forget which one) they just reiviewed
some 3d cards

[Scott McKinney]

No, 3D cards generally don't add anything to the final render pipeline.
Render times for images, like architectural renderings or animation frames,
are pretty much directly tied to processor speed and rendering method, i.e.
raytracing takes much longer than a scan line render.

The extra memory on the card provides greater color depth, larger z buffer
depth (used to determine which objects are in front), stores texures, and
sometimes used to store alpha channel info. In other words, it makes for a
faster and more interactive display while you're working on the model, but
doesn't help you at all when it comes to render time.

However, the GMX does have a geometry and lighting setup chips, which might
be used during rendering. I would think that would depend on drivers and/or
application support. You should talk to 3D Labs and get clarification about
that.

HTH

Scott McKinney

Eric Camper wrote in message <7v2tbj$75...@adesknews2.autodesk.com>...
><<< Message <7v2dnd$56...@adesknews2.autodesk.com> was originally posted to
'autodesk.aec.arch-desktop2' on Mon, 25 Oct 1999 16:13:45 -0400.>>>