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