rec.autos.simulators

Nascar 3 graphics comparisons

Peter Nilss

Nascar 3 graphics comparisons

by Peter Nilss » Wed, 22 Sep 1999 04:00:00

I just got my copy of Nascar 3 from the States shipped to me.
I, as many others, wondered 'Should I use Glide or D3D?" as I have
both an old Voodoo 2 card and a spankin' new TNT2u.

Well, a couple of screenshots later the issue was settled: Glide it
is, baby.
No noticable increase in framerate from my old 90 mHz 8Mb Voodoo card
to the new 190 Mhz 32Mb TNT2 Ultra. Funny huh?
MUCH better quality on the 3Dfx card. The anti-aliasing does it all!

You'll find three comparisions at:
http://www.racesimcentral.net/
http://www.racesimcentral.net/
http://www.racesimcentral.net/
(These were done on my Mac at work, hence the window styles etc.)

Some notes om compare1.jpg:
Texture on trucks at left is clearer on 3Dfx
Vertical lines on white grandstands far away is sharper/thinner on
3Dfx, blurred on TNT2
Horizontal lines/tops of grandstands are smooth on 3Dfx, jagged on
TNT2 (as is the case for all horizontal lines)
Small red sign (stopsign?) has visible pole on 3Dfx, floating in thin
air on TNT2

Some notes on compare2.jpg:
Texture on rear of car is MUCH netter on 3Dfx, blurred on TNT2
Details on grandstands are smooth on 3Dfx, jagged on TNT2. A-A at
work.

http://www.racesimcentral.net/
comparision of the car texture.

OK, much of the differences can be attributed to the anti-aliasing on
the 3Dfx but what really made me scratch my head was why the TNT2 with
it's huge 32Mb memory seems to load a low-res texture for the cars,
while the puny 3Dfx card, with it'd 256x256 limitation shows a much
better one?

Another funny thing is that the anti-aliasing is done on the "above"
side of lines, not 'beneath". Look at
http://www.racesimcentral.net/, the white lines to the right.

Tech specs: Celeron 450 Mhz, 96Mb, blah-blah-blah...  Creatice Labs
8Mb Voodoo 2 with Glide 2.56 drivers. Creative Labs TNT 2 Ultra with
Detonator 2.08, mip-map level set to 0, no anti-aliasing in hardware
set (didn't make a difference).

/petern

David G Fishe

Nascar 3 graphics comparisons

by David G Fishe » Thu, 23 Sep 1999 04:00:00

If N3 or any other upcoming game does not look as good, or better, with a
TNT2 and D3D as it does with a V3 and 3dfx, then it's the fault of the game.
Rally Championship is D3D only and has the best graphics ever in a racing
sim/game. The 3dfx/D3D debate is now over. RC looks fantastic with a V3, but
with a TNT2 I can run it at 1280 x 1024 x 32.

David G Fisher


Peter Nilss

Nascar 3 graphics comparisons

by Peter Nilss » Thu, 23 Sep 1999 04:00:00

Yep, that was my thinkin' too. Papy did a lousy job on with the D3D
for N3. Other games (Drakan, Heretic 2, System Shock 2, Midtown
Madness, Heavy Gear 2 etc. etc.) positively rocks in max resolution on
the TNT 2.

/petern

On Wed, 22 Sep 1999 00:55:44 -0400, "David G Fisher"


>If N3 or any other upcoming game does not look as good, or better, with a
>TNT2 and D3D as it does with a V3 and 3dfx, then it's the fault of the game.
>Rally Championship is D3D only and has the best graphics ever in a racing
>sim/game. The 3dfx/D3D debate is now over. RC looks fantastic with a V3, but
>with a TNT2 I can run it at 1280 x 1024 x 32.

>David G Fisher



>> I just got my copy of Nascar 3 from the States shipped to me.
>> I, as many others, wondered 'Should I use Glide or D3D?" as I have
>> both an old Voodoo 2 card and a spankin' new TNT2u.

>> Well, a couple of screenshots later the issue was settled: Glide it
>> is, baby.
>> No noticable increase in framerate from my old 90 mHz 8Mb Voodoo card
>> to the new 190 Mhz 32Mb TNT2 Ultra. Funny huh?
>> MUCH better quality on the 3Dfx card. The anti-aliasing does it all!

>> You'll find three comparisions at:
>> http://www2.dicom.se/peter/compare1.jpg
>> http://www2.dicom.se/peter/compare2.jpg
>> http://www2.dicom.se/peter/comparesmall.jpg
>> (These were done on my Mac at work, hence the window styles etc.)

SNIP

>> /petern

Ronald Stoeh

Nascar 3 graphics comparisons

by Ronald Stoeh » Thu, 23 Sep 1999 04:00:00


snip
> sim/game. The 3dfx/D3D debate is now over. RC looks fantastic with a V3, but
> with a TNT2 I can run it at 1280 x 1024 x 32.

What's the frame rate then? On a PII-333, I mean...

l8er
ronny

--
"I heard if you play the NT-4.0-CD backwards, you get a satanic
message."
"That's nothing, if you play it forward, it installs NT-4.0"

drbo..

Nascar 3 graphics comparisons

by drbo.. » Thu, 23 Sep 1999 04:00:00

        Well, that statement certainly shot your credibility :-).

                bob

David G Fishe

Nascar 3 graphics comparisons

by David G Fishe » Thu, 23 Sep 1999 04:00:00

You're right. I retract that statement. What was I thinking?  :-)

David G Fisher


> > The 3dfx/D3D debate is now over.

> Well, that statement certainly shot your credibility :-).

> bob


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.