Later 8086 machines from IBM had MCGA/VGA on-board.
Like that Model 25 from PS/2 series. Sure, it's no XT, but still.. 😀
I'm sorry. Since I started with a 286 PC first, I can't give a definite answer, as far as XTs are considered.
Many, many AT compatibles that were made later on either had Hercules or VGA on-board, though.
Hercules, because of its high-resolution monochrome graphics and because TTL monitors were much cheaper than anything else.
That was a perfect combination for cashier PCs, terminals and point of sale systems.
Alternatively, these systems had VGA. Or more precisely, SVGA. Almost all VGA compatibles had some extra modes.
Even the early models from 1987/1988 either supported 800x600 pels in 16c (original SVGA resolution) and/or did 640x400 pels in 256c.
Both was possible with 256KB of RAM.
My two cents:
EGA, as cool as it was, had a short lifetime, I think. The original IBM EGA was expensive, had a lousy 64-128KB of RAM and was a lame duck.
Super EGA cards were a thing until VGA showed up. Maybe for 2-3 years, dunno.
After that, Super EGA chips quickly evolved into VGA chips.
Late Super EGA clones even did mimicry and simulated VGA mode 12h (640x480 16c).
That way, ordinary VGA application software could run.
VGA also supported almost all EGA modes, so applications could continue using EGA as a video mode.
Minus the correct timing, of course. EGA in 640x350 was 60Hz, VGA in 640x400 70Hz.
From my experience (mid 90s), as far as DOS applications were considered (not GUIs),
VGA was widely adopted among all PC generations and CGA and Hercules were a curiosity.
EGA, if supported at all still, was more like a hidden feature.
DOS programs either required a special command line argument to use EGA
or relied on an auto-detection routine to use EGA as a fallback.
Like the Skyroads game did. Exceptions like Jill of Jungle and Commander Keen also existed, of course.
So long story short: VGA was a huge success from the very start.
Everyone seemingly wanted it, DOS programmers of the 90s even expected it to be available.
So I believe it didn't matter so much if performance was good or not.
An XT user , I think, that wanted to keep using current DOS software simply had to get a VGA-compatible card.
Otherwise "No EGA/VGA hardware detected" was all this user got. 😉
As usual, exceptions are th rule, of course. Hercules cards were still supported by professional software.
Since their resolution was higher than EGA even, they could still be useful.
By comparison, CGA in 640x200 was a imposition.The height was too low for applications to fit.
So unless recoding was done, QB45, Turbo Pascal, Turbo C programs didn't run properly.
I think we all know that problem from running Windows 3.x with the CGA driver.
Half the application is cut away, because the programmer expected a 640x480 screen (0r 640x350, at least).
One good thing of CGA, though: It used TV compatible timings.
So maybe some users kept using it in order to connect a PC to a TV or a VCR.
Some SVGA cards got CVBS and S-Video output capabilities in the later 90s.
Edit: I reformatted the text a bit, since I'm now at home on a real PC.
Edit: I did forget some important bit! Very important, maybe.
Generic CGA cards sometimes had a switch to select CGA/HGC, since both standards use the same Motorola chip.
So XT users could "upgrade" to Hercules if needed.
That way, professional software could be used.
"Time, it seems, doesn't flow. For some it's fast, for some it's slow.
In what to one race is no time at all, another race can rise and fall..." - The Minstrel
//My video channel//