From: cfw@world.std.com (Christopher F Wroten)
Subject: Question on EISA video board performance
Keywords: EISA, video, performance
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Lines: 25

I have an EISA machine and I just do not understand why most
EISA video cards only match the performance of their ISA
counterparts. For instance, the EISA Orchid Pro Designer IIs-E is
only about as "fast" as the ISA Diamond SpeedStar Plus, which isn't
what I would call "fast."

I don't understand why EISA video cards aren't, as a group, on the
same level of performance as Local Bus cards, given that EISA video
cards have a 32 bit bus to move data around, instead of ISA's 8 bits.

Since they are not, why would anyone (me included) pay a higher
cost for a EISA video card when its performance is no better than
and often worse that a much cheaper ISA video board, such as a
Diamond SpeedStar 24X? From PC Magazine's (I think) recent report,
I know that ATI makes a pretty fast EISA video card, but it's
around $500, which is just about double what my wallet will allow
me to spend. And, for $500, I could get a Diamond Viper and still
have $100 left over (of course, I'd have to get a Local Bus mother-
board too...)

Can anyone shed some light on my confusion/frustration?

Thanks!   Christopher Wroten, cfw@world.std.com


