rec.autos.simulators

GPL and hardware reqs

John Walla

GPL and hardware reqs

by John Walla » Tue, 08 Sep 1998 04:00:00



Rendition is better for GPL. Rendition cards are also cheaper.

Or a Rendition.

Cheers!
John

Don Burnett

GPL and hardware reqs

by Don Burnett » Tue, 08 Sep 1998 04:00:00

You would probably be most happy with a V2200 chip rendition card. I have
the Hercules Thriller 3d 8mb pci card, and it rocks for me. My system is a
233 mmx system. I have a voodoo1 card also, and will probably add voodoo2
sometime down the pike, to have the best of both.

--
Don Burnette
Palmetto Racing
Dburn on Ten
AOLL Iroc Series Administrator
http://pages.southtech.net/palmetto/aoll.htm


>Hi again,

>OK, let me clarify my earlier message as things have swung around now
>and I have the money (200) to get a 3D adapter so that I can drive GPL
>"for real".

>To recap, I have an MMX Pentium 200 with 32mb RAM and a 2mb Matrox
>Mystique graphics card.

>Could anyone give me advice on what is the best 3D card to get? I have
>heard that a rendition is better than a voodoo 2 as I don't have a PII.
>But then I've heard that a voodoo 2 is just better.

>I'm really confused!

>--
>Being appreciative in advance,
>Graeme Nash


>http://www.karisma1.demon.co.uk/gp2/
>ICQ# 11257824

>"I thought I saw someone I knew in the crowd, so I went over to say Hi" -

Schuey
Peter Gag

GPL and hardware reqs

by Peter Gag » Tue, 08 Sep 1998 04:00:00



> Hi again,

> OK, let me clarify my earlier message as things have swung around now
> and I have the money (200) to get a 3D adapter so that I can drive
> GPL
> "for real".

> To recap, I have an MMX Pentium 200 with 32mb RAM and a 2mb Matrox
> Mystique graphics card.

> Could anyone give me advice on what is the best 3D card to get? I
have
> heard that a rendition is better than a voodoo 2 as I don't have a
> PII.
> But then I've heard that a voodoo 2 is just better.

> I'm really confused!

Get a 3Dfx Voodoo1 card and another 32Mb RAM and overclock your
3Dfx card (try 55) and your cpu & buspeed, (try 3 x 75 = 225).

The Canopus 3D has 6MB instead of the usual 4Mb. You will see no
improvement from a Voodoo2 over a Voodoo1 unless you have a Pentium II.
(NB: do *NOT* get a Voodoo *RUSH* card, they are ***(compared to a
normal 3Dfx).

8-)

*Peter*    8-)
(NB: remove asterix to e-mail)

Graeme Nas

GPL and hardware reqs

by Graeme Nas » Tue, 08 Sep 1998 04:00:00

Hi,

Well, thanks for all the replies and I've given it some thought and
realised that if it weren't for GPL I wouldn't be getting a 3d card.
Hence GPL is my main reason, and hence I will probably be getting a
Hercules Thriller..... I may need voodoo technology if GP3 -ever-
appears, but that's a while off....

--
So once again, thanks to everyone for their help and I hope to be racing
you all when GPL comes out in full...!

Graeme Nash


http://www.karisma1.demon.co.uk/gp2/
ICQ# 11257824

"Look at me, look at my sponsors. Love me, love my sponsors" - Any F1 Driver

Toby Ma

GPL and hardware reqs

by Toby Ma » Tue, 08 Sep 1998 04:00:00

On Sun, 6 Sep 1998 21:46:27 +0100, Graeme Nash


>Hi again,

>OK, let me clarify my earlier message as things have swung around now
>and I have the money (200) to get a 3D adapter so that I can drive GPL
>"for real".

>To recap, I have an MMX Pentium 200 with 32mb RAM and a 2mb Matrox
>Mystique graphics card.

>Could anyone give me advice on what is the best 3D card to get? I have
>heard that a rendition is better than a voodoo 2 as I don't have a PII.
>But then I've heard that a voodoo 2 is just better.

>I'm really confused!

I noticed you're from the UK. You might like to look at ww.dabs.com.
Techworks Voodoo1 for 39+vat and Voodoo2 (12M) for 99+vat. I think
they also have the Diamond Steath for 35+vat if you want rendition
cheap.

FWIW, I was in a very similar situation (system wise and money wise!)
and went for a voodoo1 (for glide support in other games) plus an
extra 32MB RAM. I'm still tempted by a Thriller 3d but can't really
justify it for just one game :-(

BTW. Does your 200 have to include the wheel you *need* for GPL. (If
so, try the TM GP1. Not perfect but very good value!)

Toby
--
Remove NOSPAM from address if replying by email.

John Walla

GPL and hardware reqs

by John Walla » Tue, 08 Sep 1998 04:00:00

On Tue, 08 Sep 1998 07:14:56 +1000, Bruce Kennewell


>Interesting.....
>I have both a Stealth II 4Mb and a Voodoo2 8Mb in a PII-266, 512K of L2
>cache and I prefer the picture quality and colours from the V2 than the
>Stealth.

>The Rendition version seems "sugary".....now, I know that's not a tech
>term, but it appears grainy....as if sprinkled with tiny tiny crystals
>that somehow 'sparkle".

>The V2 picture is softer yet clearer and is far easier on the eye.  Not
>just my opnion but also my sons.

Since starting with GPL I've owned,at various times, Creative Labs 3D
Blaster (Rendition V1000), Intergraph Reactor (Rendition V1000),
Orchid Righteous 3D (Voodoo 1), Diamond Stealth S220 (V2100), Diamond
Monster 3D2 (Voodoo 2) and Hercules Thriller 3D (V2200 Rendition).
Quite a list :-)  I've "only" got the last two now (amd no, my
girlfriend thinks I had the same video card all the time...!).

Of all of the above the Herc Thriller is markedly better in frame-rate
than any other card, although I personally don't see a huge difference
in image quality. That may be because my monitor is old, crappy and
lacking in vibrant colour, and perhaps also because I use a fresnel
lens to get huge visuals.

The Stealth S220 was a bit of a let-down for me, since it offered
essentially the same performance as the V2. The Thriller is a step up
from that, and a noticable improvement (esp 8Mb). My eyes are getting
old and tired though, so the visuals problably don't matter to me as
much as frame-rate :-(

The "smoother" look of the 3DFX is a 3dFX thing, the way it blends
compared to other cards. I actually prefer to have less blending,
since upcoming objects come into view more sharply and earlier.

Cheers!
John

Eric T. Busc

GPL and hardware reqs

by Eric T. Busc » Tue, 08 Sep 1998 04:00:00

It would be a bit slower overall with more texture thrashing due to the
lesser amount of RAM on the card.

- Eric


Bruce Kennewel

GPL and hardware reqs

by Bruce Kennewel » Wed, 09 Sep 1998 04:00:00

Interesting.....
I have both a Stealth II 4Mb and a Voodoo2 8Mb in a PII-266, 512K of L2
cache and I prefer the picture quality and colours from the V2 than the
Stealth.

The Rendition version seems "sugary".....now, I know that's not a tech
term, but it appears grainy....as if sprinkled with tiny tiny crystals
that somehow 'sparkle".

The V2 picture is softer yet clearer and is far easier on the eye.  Not
just my opnion but also my sons.




> >You really need a 3dfx card to run GPL.
> Rendition is better for GPL. Rendition cards are also cheaper.

> >Don't bother buying GPL until you have a 3dfx card.
> Or a Rendition.

> Cheers!
> John

--
Regards,
Bruce.
----------
The GP Legends Historic Motor Racing Club  is located at:-
http://www.netspeed.com.au/brucek/legends/
Ron Ayto

GPL and hardware reqs

by Ron Ayto » Wed, 09 Sep 1998 04:00:00

Funny you should mention that Bruce, i have just upgraded my computer
to include a Stealth II for my main video card and also bought a
Monster 3d Voodoo 1 card  for 3dfx applications.
I expected the rendition based card to look better than the 3dfx card,
based on what i had previously read on this news group, but for me, the
3dfx card seems to be the better of the two as far as picture quality
goes.
I have read a lot on this news group about, "the washed out effect",
but a simple understanding of what gamma correction is, and what it is
used for, can alleviate that effect totally....
Maybe it is just our computers Bruce, but i can only report on the
facts as i see them on, "MY" computer, and the facts are that the
Voodoo card is graphically superior on my computer compared to the
rendition based card.
Cheers,
Ron



Micro Graphi

GPL and hardware reqs

by Micro Graphi » Wed, 09 Sep 1998 04:00:00

I'm just wondering what difference the 8mb in the Hercules makes? Does it
just allow you to run at a higher resolution?
If I was prepared to run GPL at 640x480 instead of 800x600 would the 4mb
Stealth compare to the Hercules in frame rates?

cheers,
Rob Yates


says...

Devo

GPL and hardware reqs

by Devo » Wed, 09 Sep 1998 04:00:00


wrote...

I've got a 12MB Voodoo2 with a P2-400 512K L2 cache.  Looking forward to
seeing what kind of frame rate I get at 800x600 with everything turned
on.  

I'm just a little concerned about replay's, though.  I only have 64MB of
RAM, and with everything turned on I think I'll be lucky to get a lap
recorded (if it's anything like the demo).  Hope Sierra works it out so
that's not the case.  Seems like that would be a waste of that beautiful
replay UI.

Devon

Byron Forbe

GPL and hardware reqs

by Byron Forbe » Wed, 09 Sep 1998 04:00:00

Gooday Ron. Good to see you back in town. Doing any more IEC stuff?

> Funny you should mention that Bruce, i have just upgraded my computer
> to include a Stealth II for my main video card and also bought a
> Monster 3d Voodoo 1 card  for 3dfx applications.
> I expected the rendition based card to look better than the 3dfx card,
> based on what i had previously read on this news group, but for me, the
> 3dfx card seems to be the better of the two as far as picture quality
> goes.
> I have read a lot on this news group about, "the washed out effect",
> but a simple understanding of what gamma correction is, and what it is
> used for, can alleviate that effect totally....
> Maybe it is just our computers Bruce, but i can only report on the
> facts as i see them on, "MY" computer, and the facts are that the
> Voodoo card is graphically superior on my computer compared to the
> rendition based card.
> Cheers,
> Ron



> > Interesting.....
> > I have both a Stealth II 4Mb and a Voodoo2 8Mb in a PII-266, 512K of
> L2
> > cache and I prefer the picture quality and colours from the V2 than
> the
> > Stealth.

> > The Rendition version seems "sugary".....now, I know that's not a
> tech
> > term, but it appears grainy....as if sprinkled with tiny tiny
> crystals
> > that somehow 'sparkle".

> > The V2 picture is softer yet clearer and is far easier on the eye.
> Not
> > just my opnion but also my sons.

Bruce Kennewel

GPL and hardware reqs

by Bruce Kennewel » Wed, 09 Sep 1998 04:00:00

There you go then Ron. (John....you reading this?!)
Exactly my feelings.....my preference is for the image produced by the
V2 card, not that produced by the Stealth.

I also have adjusted the gamma to suit my personal tastes but the
picture quality itself is, to my eyes, preferable even with default
gamma settings.


> Funny you should mention that Bruce, i have just upgraded my computer
> to include a Stealth II for my main video card and also bought a
> Monster 3d Voodoo 1 card  for 3dfx applications.

--
Regards,
Bruce.
----------
The GP Legends Historic Motor Racing Club  is located at:-
http://www.netspeed.com.au/brucek/legends/
John Walla

GPL and hardware reqs

by John Walla » Wed, 09 Sep 1998 04:00:00

On Tue, 08 Sep 1998 22:24:49 +1000, Bruce Kennewell


>There you go then Ron. (John....you reading this?!)

Aber naturlich.... (I'll see if my German grammar is more pleasing to
the ear..!).

Adjusting the gamma on the V1 and V2 definitely helps - I think I
settled on 1.2 for all three bars as the best level, and this is
equivalent to the Stealth. The Thriller _is_reported_ to give better
colours and overall look, but this hasn't been my experience, I found
it looked identical. What I did find though was that the frame-rate
was a big step up from the V2 and the Stealth, although a Celeron may
not have the "oomph" to feed a Voodoo2 (the CPU may be the bottleneck
rather than the card).

I think that's down to taste. For example I always preferred VQuake to
GLQuake, since the GLQuake looked a little blurry whereas VQuake
looked sharper but less "pretty". Most others I find look nicer on the
Voodoo. For GPL there's not too much in it for me regarding looks, but
I like the frame-rate of the Thriller. OTOH there's no way I would
have the Thriller if I had to choose between my V2 and my Thriller,
I'd far rather have the overall looks and support provided by 3dFX.

Cheers!
John

Christer Andersso

GPL and hardware reqs

by Christer Andersso » Wed, 09 Sep 1998 04:00:00

I have the exactly the same experiences with my Righteous 3D Voodoo 1 and
Stealth II. The Rendition is more grainy as if the anti-aliasing is working
better at the Voodoo 1 card.

Reading this thread I'm beginning to contemplating changing the Stealth II for
the Thriller 3D...

/Christer, not made of money... and this sport (sim racing) isn't improving
things :o)


> Funny you should mention that Bruce, i have just upgraded my computer
> to include a Stealth II for my main video card and also bought a
> Monster 3d Voodoo 1 card  for 3dfx applications.
> I expected the rendition based card to look better than the 3dfx card,
> based on what i had previously read on this news group, but for me, the
> 3dfx card seems to be the better of the two as far as picture quality
> goes.
> I have read a lot on this news group about, "the washed out effect",
> but a simple understanding of what gamma correction is, and what it is
> used for, can alleviate that effect totally....
> Maybe it is just our computers Bruce, but i can only report on the
> facts as i see them on, "MY" computer, and the facts are that the
> Voodoo card is graphically superior on my computer compared to the
> rendition based card.
> Cheers,
> Ron



> > Interesting.....
> > I have both a Stealth II 4Mb and a Voodoo2 8Mb in a PII-266, 512K of
> L2
> > cache and I prefer the picture quality and colours from the V2 than
> the
> > Stealth.

> > The Rendition version seems "sugary".....now, I know that's not a
> tech
> > term, but it appears grainy....as if sprinkled with tiny tiny
> crystals
> > that somehow 'sparkle".

> > The V2 picture is softer yet clearer and is far easier on the eye.
> Not
> > just my opnion but also my sons.

--
http://home4.swipnet.se/~w-41236/ (Read all about the "Global online
racing"-proposal under "For developers". Read it a couple of times, cause noone
has understood it the first time they've read it yet :o))

rec.autos.simulators is a usenet newsgroup formed in December, 1993. As this group was always unmoderated there may be some spam or off topic articles included. Some links do point back to racesimcentral.net as we could not validate the original address. Please report any pages that you believe warrant deletion from this archive (include the link in your email). RaceSimCentral.net is in no way responsible and does not endorse any of the content herein.