Re: LF: ti92 fast enough?
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: LF: ti92 fast enough?
On Wed, 20 Nov 1996, SAM STAUFFER wrote:
> -> If you think that the ti-92 is just fast enough and no one should
> -> think about upgrading it. After all, the 3d grapher only takes a few
> -> MINUTES to calculate a mildly complicated graph, and it is obvious
> -> that any slightly detailed version of Doom will be a slide show,
> -> making it easier, and thus
>
> Yes, I believe it should be faster. But I don't think it's a necesity.
> Besides a doom type game would be just about impossible at the speed of
> the current calc, but a Wolf3D type game would run fast.
>
You couldn't make Doom anyway becauset he LCD is too slow, everything
would just become a blur. And that's even worse in 4 grayscale colors,
which still would look terrible to texturemap in.
Besides, if you put a highend 680x0 in the TI92, you'd have to change
batteries every other day, not to mention that it would need some kind of
cooling.
If we compare the TI92 to the good old Vic-64, we have twice the Mem and
many times the speed. And there's some pretty amazeing stuff on the 64,
so we should be able to do MUCH with the present CPU. My 24 surface hidden
line vector (included in the Fargo archive) has much "raster-time" left,
so it is not that hard to make fast 3D with Fargo.
//Sasq (Jonas Minnberg)
References: