Xref: utzoo comp.misc:7026 comp.sys.apollo:3475 comp.sys.misc:2498 comp.sys.pyramid:598 comp.sys.sequent:411 comp.dcom.lans:3515 comp.unix.cray:79 Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ncar!gatech!mcnc!spl From: spl@mcnc.org (Steve Lamont) Newsgroups: comp.sys.super,comp.misc,comp.sys.apollo,comp.sys.cdc,comp.sys.misc,comp.sys.pyramid,comp.sys.sequent,comp.dcom.lans,comp.unix.cray Subject: Re: info please Message-ID: <5489@alvin.mcnc.org> Date: 28 Sep 89 18:56:38 GMT References: <341@gvlv2.GVL.Unisys.COM> <4429@internal.Apple.COM> Reply-To: spl@mcnc.org.UUCP (Steve Lamont) Distribution: usa Organization: Foo Bar Brewers Cooperative Lines: 27 In article <4429@internal.Apple.COM> ggarb@apple.com (Gordon Garb) writes: >In article <341@gvlv2.GVL.Unisys.COM> kleonard@gvlv2.GVL.Unisys.COM (Ken >Leonard) writes: >> Is Ultra (Systems Inc.?) actually shipping working systems? Who is >using one? >> How well does it work? > >We have an Ultra with two frame buffers hooked to our Cray X-MP 48 on an >HSX channel. It works well. Clearly you have a very lightly loaded machine -- on our Y -- which we've only just brought up -- the performance of the Ultra frame buffer is miserable... It is certainly not worth the time and energy that is required to get images up on it. An Abekas digital video recorder is a much better choice, considering the nature of the sort of simulations that one generally does on a Cray. Although standard video resolution is not as good, the fact that one cannot usually render images at the 1024x1280 resolution of the frame buffer, but at something considerably less, say 512^2, I don't see having the resolution of the Ultra frame buffer as a big win. spl (the p stands for pixel pusher) -- Steve Lamont, sciViGuy EMail: spl@ncsc.org NCSC, Box 12732, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 "Surrealism only comes later when it seems 'reality' becomes difficult to achieve." - E. Miya, NASA Ames Research Center