I just purchased a Viewsonic 17 and and Orchid P9000.  In short, I am happy with the monitor and unhappy with the card.  I have spent a lot more time futzing with the card, so that is what I am going to write about.  The monitor is pretty.  The moires I had under Simcity on my 17" Magnavox went away.  It isn't as heavy as I thought it would be (45 lbs, I think).  So much for the monitor.  On to the bitch session and test results.  In going with the modern trend, the Orchid P9000 card only supports 16 colors in 640x480 mode without a driver.  Of course, this breaks any DOS program which uses SVGA modes (like most of my CD-ROMs).  The Compudyne Whiplash VGA, Orchid Fahrenheit 1280, and Orchid F. VLB all share this limitation.  Those are all S3 cards, which means it is an S3 problem for them (the P9000 uses a Weitek VGA chip which also doesn't support them).  The Hercules Graphite card does seem to have these modes, but I didn't run the same test cases as I did on the other boards during the brief time I had it.  It was able to print the splash screen for the Grolier's Encyclopedia, though, which the S3 cards just printed as hash, which is why I suspect the SVGA modes are supported.  The supported resolutions really annoy me.  You can do 1280x1024 at 75Hz if you tell the driver you have an NEC 5FG (they only have about six monitors listed plus 'Generic', and if you choose Generic you can't get any high refreshes at ALL).  But at 1024x768 you are limited to 70Hz.  Seems to me that the hardware should be able to support the bandwidth (if it can do 75Hz at 1280 it sure should be able to do it at 1024!).  Higher vertical resolution was the main reason I bought the card over the Orchid F. VLB I currently have, and it will do 1024x768x70 Hz as well.  The higher graphics modes all crash HP Dashboard.  I just got off the phone with Orchid, and with the 1.1 drivers (I don't know what I have) he was unable to recreate the problem.  On the plus side, their tech rep was as helpful as he could be and booted up the program on his computer to verify he didn't have the problem.  He didn't know why they limited the refresh to 70 Hz either.  The board is faster that the OFVLB for most things according to the Hercules Speedy program. This program tests various operations and reports the results in pixels/second.  I don't have the numbers for the Graphite card, but they were close to half of the OFVLB (ie, slower) but that was running in a 20MHz 386, ISA, so the numbers aren't really comparable.  The following numbers were all obtained using a 486, 33 MHz, AIR motherboard (UMC chipset), with 8 MB memory.  I give ranges because the program reports the numbers as it computes them, and these tend to jump around a bit.   K means thousand (not 1024), M means million, pixels per second               Orchid Fahrenheit VLB                  Orchid P9000 Chip                 S3 805                          Weitek 9000 DIB to Screen        182K - 190K                     228K - 240K Memory to Screen     5.9M - 6.2M                     8.4M - 8.9M Screen to Screen     14M - 14.8M                     29M - 30.8M Vector, solid        2.4M                            2.8M - 2.9M Vector, styled       55K - 58K                       449K - 473K Polygon, shaded      1.8M - 2.1M                     1.6M - 1.9M Polygon, hatched     6.9M - 7.9M                     1.3M - 1.7M Ternary Rops         1.9M - 2.4M                     477K - 520K Font                 130K - 160K                     46K - 55K / 1.2M  The DIB to Screen test takes a device independent bitmap of a face and transfers it to the screen.  I have no idea what is being done internally as far as conversions go.  The memory to screen takes the same face and copies it to the screen, my guess is after it has been rasterized into a bitmap that can just be copied to the video display.  The screen to screen test copies that face from place to place on the screen.  Awesome!  Interestingly, the solid vectors and shaded polygons show no improvement, and hatched polygons (ie, filled with cross-hatching) and Ternary Rops (whatever they are.  Graphics operations like XORs maybe????) are a dead loss on the 9000.  I give two numbers for the 9000 fonts, because I think they are caching. When the fonts are first drawn on the screen they are done fairly slowly -- 1/3 the speed of the OFVLB.  Then the speed increases dramatically.  Sounds like programming to a benchmark to me....  I make no claims that these numbers mean anything at all.  Its just what I saw when I ran them on my computer.  I normally don't write disclaimers, but this time maybe I'd better.  My testing is totally unconnected with my work (I program under UNIX on Decstations) is done completely without the knowledge, blessing, or equipment of my company.