rec.autos.simulators

Thanks to the posts here in R.A.S. I was encouraged to purchase the
Intergraph Reactor card based on the Rendition Verite chip.  It is
fantastic!

Previously, I was using the Matrox Millennium w/ 4Mb WRAM.  I was concerned
about diminished Windows 95 performance when switching to the Reactor.  My
concern was unfounded.  I notice no change in Windows 95 operation.  On the
other hand, ICR2 is spectacular with this card.

1.  Frame rate is much improved as advertised and expected.  With a P133 a
frame rate of 30 seems the norm although occasionally it will drop into the
mid 20's in heavy traffic.  Still very smooth.

2.  Surprisingly, the car set which I brought over from the original
version of ICR2 without modification appears much improved.  When passing
cars (or getting passed) it is very easy to read the sponsor names and car
number.  Much greater detail than with the old video card.

3.  Most importantly, the Indianapolis track converted as before and is
spectacular with improved clarity and detail.  This amazed me since no
modifications were made.  

Clearly, the Rendition Verite card and the Rendition version of ICR2 make a
lot of difference even when using older car sets and tracks.  How?  I have
no idea.  But I have never been more pleased with the results of spending
$199.

G. Kush

You can thank your friends bi-linear filtering (smoothing the textures),
anti-aliasing (smoothing lines and polygon edges), and perspective
correction (keeps textures in the appropriate position regardless of
viewing angle).  There are other things that come into play (like the
translucent haze on the horizon) but these are responsible for the major
improvements.

--

Emory University Graduate School of Arts & Sciences
Nascar Setups Page: http://userwww.service.emory.edu/~ebusch/

What resolution do you use?  I doubt that it is 1280x1024x16bpp or
higher.

So, what is really new about the Intergraph version of ICR?  I get
30fps with all detail on max with my PPro200 using the old ICR2.

Has the driving model been updated or is it still the crappy 2-D
sheet-of-ice type of driving model?  Seems ironic that a 3-D game does
not have any 3rd dimension with a vertical axis.

Have any new enhancements been made such as curbs or better sound?  Or
is it just an ICR2 with smoother polygons?

Personally, I'm going to be getting a Orchid 3DFX board so, unless
there is a substantially improved (in gameplay) Direct3D release or
3DFX port, Sierra won't be getting any more of my money.  I don't wish
to, (or feel I should have to) give up the speed, clarity and
resolution of my 4MB Matrox Millienium at 1280x1024.

Actually, the card does support that resolution and quite nicely I might
add, though it's a bit small for my tastes.

Considering with the Intergraph version I get 30pfs on my lowly P120 at
higher detail levels than the regular version (see below for the
enhancements of this version), I'm not too impressed.  To get that
performance, it only cost me an extra $200.  How much was your PPro?

The physics model, as far as I know, has not been changed.

No curbs and I don't know about the sound (I've never really played the old
version).  As far as improvements go, for starters how about anti-aliasing
of all lines and polygon edges, bi-linear filtering of textures, a new
textured sky, and full graphic detail in the mirrors.  Also, five of the
tracks have been completely revamped with 16-bit color textures.  All of
this running at much higher framerates than the original version.

With Sierra producing its own card based on the Verite chip, I wouldn't
expect a Direct3D port anytime soon.  The Verite cards are very similar to
the Matrox in terms of VESA 2.0 SVGA speeds (they may even be faster).
Right now they will be slower in Windows, but you have to keep in mind it
is their initial driver release.  Even the Matrox has shown marked
improvement since its first drivers.  If I had paid the price you did for
your Matrox, I would be very hesitant to replace it as well.

--

Emory University Graduate School of Arts & Sciences
Nascar Setups Page: http://userwww.service.emory.edu/~ebusch/

Where can I learn more about this card. I am running a p133, with an ATI
Mach 64. I am very unhappy. Thanks in advance

Mike

I had an identical system a few months ago and was able to run NCR1 with car
detail, skids/paint, and smoke/dirt on with 38 draw ahead, 3 behind and 2
heard, and the sim ran very smooth (no jerkiness at all).  That's more than
acceptable for racing.

You might try getting ATI's Vesa driver (m64vbe) and then running the sim.  
This helped a little.

ABOUT THE INTERGRAPH CARD - Get one.  I did, and ICR2 is fantasic.

/===================================================\
| John Simmons (Redneck Techno-Biker)               |

| http://www2.connectnet.com/users/jms/index.html   |
\===================================================/

Dave (davids) Sparks
Late Night League
http://www.sequoia-dev.com/Hawaii/latenite.html

A. Renault

With ICR2 you should be able to get framerates in the mid to upper 20's
pretty consistently on the track with full graphic details.  It may dip
into the high ***s when in very heavy traffic.  My P120 (on a slow Zappa
MB) is maxed out at 30fps most of the time.

--

Emory University Graduate School of Arts & Sciences
Nascar Setups Page: http://www.racesimcentral.net/~ebusch/

A. Renault

:
:> I have a P100 with 32 Mb ram, 256k write-back cache and my video card
:> is a Trident TGUI9440AGi.  What kind of improvement can I hope for if
:> I buy Intergraph's Reactor?
:>
:> A. Renault
:
:It depends.  On games specifically written to use the Rendition chip,
:they will blaze.  I'd bet that a P100 could run GP2 with EVERYTHING on
:at 30 fps no problem, IF Micoprose wrote a patch to take advantage of
:the Rendition chip.  Without it, your improvement may vary.  As for
:ICR2/NASCAR2, they will fly!!!  I chose rendition because I believe they
:will dominate the market for now, and I didn't want to be stuck with a
:"better" card (i.e. Voodo 3D-FX) that had no games supporting it.
:
:Mike

Where in the hell are you getting the info for games for 3DFX??? There are more
games available for the Voodoo than the Rendition!!  I am waiting for the F1 sim
fo my Voodoo card.

I think it's really a pain in the ***to switch cards in and out just to play
ICR2..This really sucks!!! I favor the Voodoo anytime..

I  have both the Voodoo and Rendition card...

Could someone please set a standard????

Forget Direct 3d it's slow right now..

take care

Julian Data
IVGA Member #0004
Director of Information Technology
ACE Beta Tester and Driver of IVGA
Channel Operator of #ivga on IRC (Undernet)
Powered by IVGA Pro Gamer System P6-200 oc 233, 96MB EDO

Mike

If you have both, what's the problem.  Games designed for each card should
run, oblivious to the fact that the other card is present.  Why would you
need to remove the Voodoo to play ICR2?

--

Emory University Graduate School of Arts & Sciences
Nascar Setups Page: http://www.racesimcentral.net/~ebusch/

I don't know how many games are written specifically to both cards, but with
the advent of Direct 3D under Win95, the Voodoo will rule unless Rendition has
some new advanced chipset up their collective sleeves which will equal/exceed
the Voodoo in performance.

I have an Intergraph because I play Nascar Racing quite a bit (and quake), and
because it came with ICR2, and it's available right now (unlike Sieera's and
CL's card).

Market domination?  I don't think so.  Market leader? Maybe and only
temporarily since 3D accellerators are a burgeoning (sp) hardware group, and
there's always something better coming out the following week.

/===================================================\
| John Simmons (Redneck Techno-Biker)               |

| http://www2.connectnet.com/users/jms/index.html   |
\===================================================/