View Full Version : Textures? Quartz Extreme?

05-08-2002, 11:28 AM
There has been a flood of discussion about the requirements for OS X's Jaguar to use Quartz Extreme. And rather than fix what's wrong or broken and trying to optimize it is what I'd call a "quantum leap" while there are outstanding problems it seems with either the hardware or drivers of older videocards (older) or "that's so yesterday" in this case DOES literally mean _yesterday_!

A MacInTouch (http://www.macintouch.com) reader's comments today
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> James Back describes a problem with "texture management" support in Apple's Mac OS X and Mac OS video drivers:

"I sent in a Apple System Profiler report to Bungie documenting the extremely slow frame rates (1-3 fps) I was experiencing on my B/W G3 w/400 Mhz Sonnet G4 upgrade. I got the following reply:

Apple, ATi and nVidia have identified texture management problems in their video card drivers for Mac OS X and earlier versions of the Mac OS. This causes long delays when textures are unloaded from the video card memory.
? Most 3D Shooters, such as Unreal and Quake load textures once at the start of a game session and unload them once at the end of the game session. Thus, the texture management issue is never seen in these types of games. Diablo II and Lord of Destruction continually load and unload textures to video card memory even in the same Act.
? We recommend you run Diablo II and Lord of Destruction in Software mode until Apple, ATi and nVidia correct the texture management issues in their video card drivers. This is something we can not correct for in our game code.

I lose a lot of detail in software mode vs. Open GL. Have you or your readers heard anything from Apple, ATI or nVidia regarding a fix to this video card driver issue?
? And how can we (older system owners) encourage Apple to update the OS X video drivers to support the 'older' video cards shipped in our machines? (Lombard Powerbook, B/W G3, iMacs, et.al.)" <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

05-08-2002, 02:28 PM
While we are all speculating about 10.2, any chance that those us with pre-AGP macs will be able to enjoy the speed increases everyone is talking about?

If I buy a Radeon 7000 card for BW G3, will I see much gain? Will it ever be possible (new drivers, or a new/different PCI card when the time comes), or should I just plan on a new machine?

Wait and see, wait and see...

05-08-2002, 03:04 PM
I am sure that Jaguar will show improvements in non-QE systems, but the PCI bus doesn't allow for using QE it seems.
No direct-to-memory communication.

One thing you can do that does help now, today, is to enable window compression, using WinCompressX.
I use it on beige rev a with its ancient video built-in w/ 6MB upgrade - and it is fine for me, I don't notice
or feel it hinders - or is slow. 10.1 and earlier were slow. B&W also has G4/500 and the Radeon 2000.
Yet the beige (g3/466 512MB) is no slouch and equal to it in most ways... so I now use the beige for X
and B&W is running 9.2.2 until there is better support for RAID and 39160.

Apple is loading up stuff into OS X rather than just getting it working. Which strikes me as stretching
resources and pushing the date when there will be compilers and drivers optimized for OS X code.
But that's how they push the hardware, test it, and sell more machines. ATI sells their card, and then
optimizes drivers etc? Seems that way. But someone from ATI stops by the video card forum over on www.xlr8yourmac.com (http://www.xlr8yourmac.com) and it seems that Apple and ATI etc have been working on this QE for some time.

When you think about all the new technology, there is also lots of room for hardware bugs, what I
call "rev 1" -itis where you want to wait for at least 3-4 months or more for new designs.

G4 history: Yikes! Sawtooth AGP Digital Audio DP QuickSilver QS 2002...
everything is also evolving and a transition. Quartz Extreme - DDR - rack-mount servers - 400 mhz bus?
I want to sit out buying a new Mac for at least a year.

I was hoping by now to have a dual-G4 from XLR8 for my B&W that would run 9.2.2 and OS X 10.1.
Seems wasteful to spend $800 on beige at this point.

What no one likes is to feel like there is planned obsolescence. I've seen where moving from one OS
to the next along with new hardware did present a huge change in resource demands. Running DOS
and then moving to OS/2 caused "sticker shock" when the minimums were 4MB RAM, 8MB recommended.
When 1MB of RAM was ~$100.


05-08-2002, 09:54 PM
quick question, what is this WinCompressX that you speak of. I have bassically given up on using 10 on my Beige because of the video requirements, I have an All In One, and I can't easily upgrade the video (I did the 6 meg upgrade like you), and if you can show me the light, I'd appreciate it.


05-09-2002, 05:30 AM
WinCompressX - http://homepage.mac.com/kendals/FileSharing3.html

you can always go to www.VersionTracker.com (http://www.VersionTracker.com) or MacFixit Library and look in OS X Utilities section.