Reply 140 of 343, by vasyl
Precisely. The guide should reflect this difference.
I've done some benchmarking in an attempt to figure out if there is any benefit of using "Turbo" driver instead of the generic one from WFW. It appears that there is not that much. Here are Ziff-Davis WinBench 96 scores:
a) Generic SVGA driver
Total 3.13; individual scores 3.31, 2.88, 1.86, 2.34, 1.98, 3.04, 0.917, 8.04, 1.29, 1.09, 0.0809, 0.101, 0.202
b) Non-Turbo Tseng ET4000 driver
Total 3.04; individual scores 3.73, 2.47, 1.84, 1.94, 1.54, 3.63, 0.917, 10.7, 1.33, 1.06, 0.0814, 0.0943, 0.235
c) Turbo Tseng ET4000 driver
Total 3.11; individual scores 3.52, 2.53, 1.6, 2.22, 2.2, 3.7, 1.52, 10.1, 1.46, 1.07, 0.08, 0.101, 0.201
All tests are in 1024x768x256. There are a lot of factors that influence these numbers but the important thing is that almost all differences seem to be within error margin. According to the total score all three drivers perform nearly identically. However, the numbers for test 8 differ by about 20%, a little to much to be a fluke. This is one of copy tests and my theory is that in the generic driver it uses single bank for read and write but in OEM drivers separate banks are used minimizing bank switching.
For those wondering why the last individual tests have scores that low -- those are StretchBlt tests, they were slow on the real hardware as well.
Conclusion: generic driver is fine. There may be minor advantage in using "Turbo" driver. Non-Turbo driver is not recommended -- it is not faster and it has oddly modified standard colors.
IIRC, those WinBench scores are not that different from real scores on ISA ET4000 card -- I think mine had between 3 and 4.