Dissadvantages of Voodoo

[old.cspiby]

The Voodoo's have some dissadvantages, I remember that one is they can only do 16bit colour but what are the rest?

 

[kryt]

they sux0r
go get a tnt2u, they are cheaper now anyway. quicker, 32bit etc etc

{SM3G}Kryogen

 

[old.TUG]

If we r talking V3's, no they dont sux0r at all... they are actually the cheapest out of TNT2's and V3's and the vanilla TNT2's are slow. Only bother with ultra's and even so, in extensive testing i found my V3 to be faster than my Ultra TNT2 (which i had for a week before selling

)

Downsides to V3's though:

16 bit only,
256x256 texture size,
No full agp support
Max 16 meg local mem

Thats yer lot...

however:

Fast(ish)
Cheap
Compatable
Highly overclockable with a teeny bit of extra cooling.

On that note, get yer cooling gear from www.clockspeed.co.uk

Happy Xmas!

 

[old.cspiby]

Thanks, what is the normal texture size for say a Tnt or a gforce? What do you mean by that they don't fully support agp?

Thanks

Merry Crimbo!

 

[old.Necro]

VooDoo cards (inc the latest V3s) are limited to 16-bit colour (just about all the other major recent 3d cards support 32bit).

If you've got a VooDoo1 then its really an outdated card.

 

[old.frankie]

yoyoyo, hows it going
ya
tnt2's as far as i know support texture sizes of 2000x2000 or something close
and 32 bit looks well nice after a while


------------------
----------------------
-------------------------
----------------------
DR_FRANKENSTIEN

 

[old.TUG]

Texture size on TNT2 = 2048x2048

No full agp means it only uses the agp bus bandwidth but doesnt actually shift textures using agp2x across the bus, unlike a TNT2...

TNT2's are slower than V3's anyhooo

 

[kryt]

Well i dunno what sorta system ur running but ive gone through a v3 3000 (which i purchased at 129.99) and now on a diamond viper 770U tnt2u card, which i got for 93.99 (Staff discount i know, but normal price is 99.99 inc vat)
Im getting a LOT more fps chucked out at me with me tnt2u than the v3 i had (only excuse for getting rid of the v3, there wasnt a copy of unreal with it, so i took it back, not as if unreals that good anyway

)
Running a celeron 366@550, abit bh6 128meg atm, im no benchmarking wizard (cos i cant be arsed to get off me arse and try)
Timedemo 1 gives me 120fps after running it a few times to warm up, i havent got round to trying crusher or massive1 demos yet, ill start dloading them now and find out.
I managed to get the tnt2u cheaper, it was a sale anyway, i think they are about the same price retail anyway, are they not? (altho ive seen OEM v3 3000s for 85 measly quid)

It depends what your after. 32 Bit colour IS nice, but do you need it? V3's will run everything i know fine as is.
After all im only a hardware techy

BTW Tug -Just got given a big Gateway case and PSU unit - a chrimbo tip for a PC i built for someone - Real nice case and all, class cooling in it, and built like a brick shithouse. Thing is. The ATX power lead from PSU>Mobo is about 2 inches too short to reach the mobo :/ The psu is currently held on with 1 screw, at 40 degrees to everything else, with the top off so it will reach - any way of extending it that you know of? (without resorting to cutting stuff, cant be titted with soldering and stuff

)

{SM3G}Kryogen

 

[old.TUG]

Me sys:

Celeron 366 overclocked to 605MHz
Global WIN FDP32 3" tall cooler
Abit BM6 motherboard
128 megz PC100 ram
Globalwin 802 ATX midi tower case - detachable panels, slide out mobo tray, 2 80mm fans, 300w PSU)
Mitsumi 1.44mb FDD
13.5gig IBM 7200rpm, ata66, 2 meg buffer HD
Slimline HD cooler for above HD
2.5gig maxtor diamond max 5400rpm HD
40X Philips CD ROM
4x4x20 Ricoh CDRW
Videologic sonic vortex 2 sound card running:
Creative CSW100 sat/sub setup + also linked to home stereo
V3 2000 overclocked to 170MHz
Super Duper Slot Fan Card to cool V3
15" LG monitor
Diamond Supra Express 56SPi K56/V.90 moodem
Generic Keyboard
Genius Netmouse Pro Mouse

I agree bout 32 bit being nice but not totally neccessary, and with the newer V3 drivers with alpha blending tweaks it looks like its inda emulating 32bit anyway... Not bad

Me TNT2 Creative Ultra with a free joypad was 103.40 from dabs, I sold it to a m8 whos running me old BH6/300a @ 464...

They aint bad TNT2's, but for some reason mine wasnt anywhere near as fast as ppl make out... so in went the V3 again

Ill prob nick a geforce DDR from work soon anyway...

 

[old.TUG]

ahh the case, if possible, drill some new holes for the PSU a bit lower down.. apart from that, not much u can do except get another psu with longer psu->mobo atx connector

 

[old.cspiby]

Thanks for your input! But what is AGP texturing? I've heard that the V4 and 5's don't support that, is it another dissadvantage?

 

[old.rockhard]

lo

Thought i'd put my 2 pennies worth in for ya:-

Ive got a V3 3000 on a Celeron 400 with 128mb ram.
Ive got another system with a P3 600 Geforce DDR and 128mb ram.

My conclusion between the two cards are that the V3 is only just! capable or runnin Q3 at reasonable frame rates.
The Geforce DDR sys rocks in comparison

)
The V3 has to be set at 640x480x16 with 1/4 textures, low geometric detail, bilinear filtering to give between 30-50 fps (in game and not time demo REAL WORLD!)

The Geforce is set at 1024x728x32 with 3/4 textures, high geo detail, trilinear and gives 50-90fps!

When ya look at the two next to each other it is like lookin at the comparison between a Voodoo1 and a Voodoo3!

If you want picture quality and fps i reckon nowt can touch the DDR at the mo (IMHO)

Hope this helps.

Seasons greetings,

Rockhard

 

[old.TUG]

Rockhard you phewl

DDR = 190 quid
V3 3k = 90 quid

Theres the difference m8.

 

[old.TUG]

Oh aye - u cant compare those cards when ones on a lowly 400MHz CPU and the others on a mid 600!!!

I have me celly at 605 and hopefully can get a DDR from work sometime soon at trade price and that will shift!

Put that DDR in yer 400 celly and it'll prob be faster than PIII using V3...

Anyway, i have a V3 2k @ 170MHz on the celly@605 and its quite fast in q3 - i basically use high quality and its playable all the time... 35-50+ fps consistent which aint bad really... But yea, DDR geforces are indeed very nice but from what i can gather from the initial post here, we are prob talkin bout cards like V3's as they are cheap... DDR geforces aint cheap

BTW rockhard, those fans i sent yaz ok?

 

[old.rockhard]

Hehe,

Looks like me gettin backs up

Sorry

Anyways the V3 was originally on the P3. When the V3 was on the P3 was only doin about 5fps more than it is now and certainly wasnt capable of doin anything above 800x600 for competitive online gaming. The reason i say this is that when you had loads of action like five players blasting away in the same frame the V3 slowed

putting me at a disadvantage

Dont get me wrong TUG

I like the V3 but it aint what i wanted for Q3. After all i was gettin sick and tired of gettin my ass kicked when the goin got busy due to my pc starting to struggle and low res low textures meant i may as well go back to playin Q2 which (IMHO) is made for the V3.

From what ive been readin tho for a cheap high performing vid card for games like Q3 starting to look like the Savage 2000 might be the answer. What ya reckon?

Please dont flame me :/. I only wanted to give cspiby an incite into my experiences with the 2 vid cards and i must confess i aint the most knowledgeable of people, so take with a pinch of salt and keep in back of mind as you read the reviews and comparisons on the net

Oh those fans TUG - COOL! (KEWL!)

If anyone needs some overclocking equipment/cpu's/memory etc go look at TUGS page @ www.clockspeed.co.uk

Regards,

Rockhard

P.S. Just run Q3 on both systems with monitors within eye view and the difference in picture quality regarding colour is stunning. The Geforce in 32bit brings back the feeling of eye candy all over again! (DM9 - Oooh!) If you can get a geforce TUG you'll see what i mean! Cyas

[This message has been edited by rockhard (edited 28 December 1999).]

 

[old.TUG]

Aye the V3 is indeed well suited to q2, but i spose i agree when u say hectic scenes fuck da V3 up - well the whole PC really, so yea, a DDR would kik ass as a q3 card

Ill try to get one - believe it or not im still skinters - have been fer months and will be forever by the looks of it

BUT i WILL find a way to get that DDR

And rockhard knows what hes on about for sure when he says goto www.clockspeed.co.uk - u canna beet the service i provide - best support in the business

(rockhard, the thermal compounds in the post

- i cant afford to send you an OC'd PIII 500@800 just yet m8 hehe)

 

[old.rockhard]

Hehe

Dont worry about the thermal compound bud

Got enough to keep me goin for a lifetime!

Anyways TUG, when your able to do us a P3 800E (100 fsb) @ 1064 (133 fsb) that is stable with a Alpha P3125 please let us know

Regards,

Rockhard

[This message has been edited by rockhard (edited 28 December 1999).]

 

[old.TUG]

hehe will do m8y

You get that alpha with yer PIII450@600 i take it? Tried to get any higher than 600?

My celly is totally ROCK at 605 now... wasnt a coupla weeks ago - burn in does wonders!

went into windows at 633 yesterday! Big potential from a 55 quid cpu - i see 700MHz with a peltier... ooooo

[This message has been edited by TUG (edited 28 December 1999).]

 

[old.rockhard]

Heh

I got me P3450 runnin @ 600 @ 2.2v for stability so aint got much voltage left to play with

148 fsb be nice but for the sake of 66 mhz which'll give me bugger all more fps etc dont feel its worth rockin the boat with an already totally rockstable setup

Hehe - P3450@600's been my best bargain buy so far, specially when ya look at price of a pucker 600! Cost me £180 with Alpha

U gettin 600+ out of a £55 Cpu. Thats real Kewl

After seeing that AMD are gonna be cutting their prices looks like me gettin a P3800E @ 1060 aint gonna be that far off now TUG

Regards,

Rockhard

P.S. U ask if i get my Alpha with P3 - Fraid so. Gives me CPU (RT2) of 32C with NO cooling programs like CPU Idle! Kewl

[This message has been edited by rockhard (edited 29 December 1999).]

[This message has been edited by rockhard (edited 29 December 1999).]

 

[old.Maverick]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Thanks for your input! But what is AGP texturing? I've heard that the V4 and 5's don't support that, is it another dissadvantage?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's a huuuuge disadvantage not to have AGP texturing. It probably wasn't _too_ bad for the v1/v2 because of their age, but it was a mistake for the V3 and is just unforgiveable that it is still missing in the V4/V5.

Because a video card has a limited amount of memory it can only store so many textures. You also need to have memory reserved for framebuffers (what the card draws on) and (in some games) a Z-buffer as well.

As you increase your screen depth (16/32-bit color) and resolution then more of this memory is kept for framebuffers and less is availible for textures. Also if you want to use 32-bit textures then this again will rapidly eat into your video memory.

Now if a game such as Quake or Unreal have more textures than will fit into memory, then they need to put them somewhere else. For a card which supports AGP then it can put them into AGP memory which is slower than having them in video memory, but is still fairly fast.

Now, for 'proper' AGP cards this means that when they need a texture that is in AGP memory they can read it directly from where it is stored and write it directly to the framebuffer (the picture they are drawing).

so AGP-&gt;Framebuffer;

However 3dfx cards are not 'proper' AGP cards. They are unable to texture from memory that is not in the cards video memory. If they require a texture which is in AGP memory it must first be moved into a reserved space of videocard memory eg:

AGP-&gt;CPU-&gt;VideoCard_Mem-&gt;Framebuffer.

Not only is this slower, but it consumes CPU time to move the texture.

As textures get bigger, or you run in higher resolution then this takes longer and longer and begins to affect performance more.

The reason 3dfx cards don't properly texture is so that 3dfx can produce cheap PCI versions for people who don't have AGP motherboards. If voodoo cards properly used AGP then it would require more work (read: money) to produce PCI versions.

// maverick

 

[old.TUG]

still fast tho

 

[old.frankie]

yeah, in low resolutions, who wants that
the minimum average nowadays if 1024 x 768

and as new games come out, they will come out with more and more textures, maybe even some that are photo realistic, so it could look like the real world, but thats in the future. thing is, geforces are good, and later next year there will be the faster geforces chucking out like 800 mtexels, which is easily comparible with the v4/5

best bet is to wait till mid next year for the "super" geforces

------------------
----------------------
-------------------------
----------------------
DR_FRANKENSTIEN

 

[old.TUG]

err franke u know very well that i use 1024*768 on my V3 and it benched faster than yer TNT2 on a similar speed cpu.

tit

I aint gonna argue k? Just saying, ive used BOTH tnt2's and V3's as u know and know wot im on about - V3's are totally comparable to TNT2's in any res nowadays with latest drivers. Do some research and u will see that.

I aint gonna say any more so dont go trying to start a gay one sided argument. I sold TNT2 as i wasnt happy with its performance and image quality wasnt anywhere near as exclusive to the V3 as ppl make out. I figured - i could sell me tnt2 NOW and not lose any cash - so i did. The v3 will be easier to sell when the time comes.

I aint saying TNT2's are shit... they are fine cards, but it wasnt an upgrade really so it had to go

ppl dont start flaming me saying im a 3dfx only man cuz thats bollox too. I just dont like ppl posting inaccurate info for others who aint totally clued up to soak in. Anyway, me v3 is slow now as is a TNT2 so i do believe i must buy a DDR geforce

[This message has been edited by TUG (edited 29 December 1999).]

 

[old.frankie]

was tug the only person who missed the point of my post ????????????????????????????/&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;

what im saying is this. "the absence of the AGP textureing in the v4/v5, if thats true of what people have said, means that the v4/5 wont be such a good idea will it ???, all of the games comming out from now on are going to me more and more textured, meaning the v4/5 will have to get textures the hard way. The geforce will become more and more powerfull, as powerfull as the v5 in the end. NVIDIA say that they will keep pushing the clock up on the chips, and when the yeilds get better, they will overclock better too. in the end there will be 200 mhz core on the geforces, meaning 800 mtextels, which will be comparible to the v5, top of the range."

&gt;&gt; all this combined with the onboard T&L will mean lightning speed&lt;&lt;

that fill rate would mean this &gt;&gt; 100 fps in 1024x768 in 32 bit, with the most complex scenes in the region of 10000-20000 polygons.
which is good

with all these new games having more and more realistic textures you would be silly to go for a card that doesent do AGP texturing.


I like the tnt2 thats all.
TUG m8, how much would ya sell ya v3 for ??

if i got a pci 1, i would be able to use me p3 @ 600
which would be nice

------------------
----------------------
-------------------------
----------------------
DR_FRANKENSTIEN




[This message has been edited by frankie (edited 29 December 1999).]

 

[old.TUG]

Me would sell V3 for 60ish...

wanna know a trick frankie? Lower yer agp aparture to 4 meg... this will disable AGP sidebanding and reduce to agp 1x but u might be able to run it on an 89MHz agp bus... if stable, increase aparture bit by bit till u have found its maximum possible setting for stability.

I hear this werkz good