Hi all,

I know this has been asked before, but after reading many posts on the
subject, I'm still not sure what the general concensus is.

I have a new sun blade 2000 which has a Creator 3d and since I've moved
my U10 to the job of mailserver replacing my LX, I've had to take out
the elite m3 card so it will display on a pc type monitor.

Anyhow, is it worth fitting it to the blade?
The majority of stuff I do is 2d

Would it be worth it?

Many thanks.

Mark

> I have a new sun blade 2000 which has a Creator 3d and since I've moved
> my U10 to the job of mailserver replacing my LX, I've had to take out
> the elite m3 card so it will display on a pc type monitor.
>
> Anyhow, is it worth fitting it to the blade?
> The majority of stuff I do is 2d
>
> Would it be worth it?

Sure, one more card means one more monitor. I currently work on a 3
monitor system and i will never go back. For 2D the performance is
still acceptable.

llothar wrote:
> > I have a new sun blade 2000 which has a Creator 3d and since I've moved
> > my U10 to the job of mailserver replacing my LX, I've had to take out
> > the elite m3 card so it will display on a pc type monitor.
> >
> > Anyhow, is it worth fitting it to the blade?
> > The majority of stuff I do is 2d
> >
> > Would it be worth it?
>
> Sure, one more card means one more monitor. I currently work on a 3
> monitor system and i will never go back. For 2D the performance is
> still acceptable.

Thanks for the response llothar, I wasn't actually meaning running 2
monitors, although as nice as it is, I already have 2 screens on my
desk at the moment and adding a third leaves it quite cramped (even
with TFTs). No, what I was sorta asking was, would it be worth
replacing the creator 3d card that's already fitted with the elite m3
3D?

Thanks

> Thanks for the response llothar, I wasn't actually meaning running 2
> monitors, although as nice as it is, I already have 2 screens on my
> desk at the moment and adding a third leaves it quite cramped (even
> with TFTs). No, what I was sorta asking was, would it be worth
> replacing the creator 3d card that's already fitted with the elite m3
> 3D?

No. The creator3d is a newer card generation, with better performance
and higher resolution. The elite3D for example stops at 1280x1024 while
creator3d can be upto 1920x1200(1600?).
The creator3d also has a few more 2d window operations implemented in
hardware (based on there press release).

Sorry i only have links in german:
http://www.cs.inf.ethz.ch/37-235/stu...lin_report.pdf
is a student report about graphics cards at this time (~ 1998)

Hi,

llothar wrote:
>>Thanks for the response llothar, I wasn't actually meaning running 2
>>monitors, although as nice as it is, I already have 2 screens on my
>>desk at the moment and adding a third leaves it quite cramped (even
>>with TFTs). No, what I was sorta asking was, would it be worth
>>replacing the creator 3d card that's already fitted with the elite m3
>>3D?
>
>
> No. The creator3d is a newer card generation, with better performance
> and higher resolution. The elite3D for example stops at 1280x1024 while
> creator3d can be upto 1920x1200(1600?).
> The creator3d also has a few more 2d window operations implemented in
> hardware (based on there press release).
>
Is that true(creator3d is a newer card generation) than elite3D, I
remember the creator 3D arrived when the first Ultrasparc
WS(Ultra1-170E) was launched, was Elite available then?

/michael

On Sun, 4 Jun 2006, llothar wrote:

> No. The creator3d is a newer card generation, with better performance
> and higher resolution. The elite3D for example stops at 1280x1024 while
> creator3d can be upto 1920x1200(1600?).
> The creator3d also has a few more 2d window operations implemented in
> hardware (based on there press release).

I think the Elite3D is newer than the Creators, but I agree with your
recommendations. I have a Sun Blade 1000, and the Creator 3D was much
more satisfactory for 2D stuff than the Elite 3DM6 that preceded it.

The Creator's higher maximum resolution was also important to me.

--
Rich Teer, SCNA, SCSA, OpenSolaris CAB member

President,
Rite Online Inc.

Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638
URL: http://www.rite-group.com/rich

> Is that true(creator3d is a newer card generation) than elite3D, I

I found this german PR on the net
http://de.sun.com/company/press-rele...8/PM98_04.html

So i guess that the Elite3D m3/m6 is indeed never then the oldest
modell of the Creator3D but there is a Creator3D version that is newer
or at least the some age then the Elite3D.

By the way the press release (1998) mentions that the Ultra 60 Elite3D
(which you get for 100 bucks on EBay) was 46250 DM or around 26000 US$
these days - ROTFL.

Hi,

llothar wrote:
>
>>Is that true(creator3d is a newer card generation) than elite3D, I
>
>
> I found this german PR on the net
> http://de.sun.com/company/press-rele...8/PM98_04.html
>
> So i guess that the Elite3D m3/m6 is indeed never then the oldest
> modell of the Creator3D but there is a Creator3D version that is newer
> or at least the some age then the Elite3D.
>
> By the way the press release (1998) mentions that the Ultra 60 Elite3D
> (which you get for 100 bucks on EBay) was 46250 DM or around 26000 US$
> these days - ROTFL.
>
Thats a bargain, Check SGI boxes



/michael

On Sun, 04 Jun 2006 18:51:15 GMT
Rich Teer <rich.teer@rite-group.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 4 Jun 2006, llothar wrote:
>
> > No. The creator3d is a newer card generation, with better
> > performance and higher resolution. The elite3D for example stops at
> > 1280x1024 while creator3d can be upto 1920x1200(1600?).
> > The creator3d also has a few more 2d window operations implemented
> > in hardware (based on there press release).
>
> I think the Elite3D is newer than the Creators, but I agree with your
> recommendations. I have a Sun Blade 1000, and the Creator 3D was much
> more satisfactory for 2D stuff than the Elite 3DM6 that preceded it.

That was not my experience, at least not at 1280x1024. The Creator 3D
was far slower filling rectangles in Gnome, with obvious flashes of
cyan while the images were formed. This could of course be a driver
problem, but I quickly change back to the Elite.

On the other hand, the XVR-1000 I upgraded to recently is noticeably
faster than the Elite3Dm3, but also uses between 20 and 30W more.

--
Stefaan A Eeckels
--
"What is stated clearly conceives easily." -- Inspired sales droid

On 4 Jun 2006 13:32:59 -0700
"llothar" <llothar@web.de> wrote:

>
>
> > Is that true(creator3d is a newer card generation) than elite3D, I
>
> I found this german PR on the net
> http://de.sun.com/company/press-rele...8/PM98_04.html
>
> So i guess that the Elite3D m3/m6 is indeed never then the oldest
> modell of the Creator3D but there is a Creator3D version that is newer
> or at least the some age then the Elite3D.
>
> By the way the press release (1998) mentions that the Ultra 60 Elite3D
> (which you get for 100 bucks on EBay) was 46250 DM or around 26000 US$
> these days - ROTFL.

In those days PC hardware was catching up, but a dual processor U60 with
two Elite cards was a very capable platform and priced significantly
below comparable sgi machines. It was certainly far more capable than a
Windows NT 4.0 machine with the same specifications (remember that the
AGP specification only came out in 1997, and that the fastest Pentium II
you could buy in January 1998 was running at 333MHz.

By today's standards these were ridiculous prices, but I remember
buying a 333MHz dual-processor Pentium II (with 512MB, SCSI disks and a
Matrox Mystique) in 1998 for the equivalent of 7500DM, something that's
also ROTFL material today.

--
Stefaan A Eeckels
--
He who will not reason, is a bigot;
he who cannot is a fool;
and he who dares not is a slave. (Sir William Drummond)