rec.autos.simulators

F1 2000 : use a TNT2 ot Voodoo3 ?

cj..

F1 2000 : use a TNT2 ot Voodoo3 ?

by cj.. » Tue, 25 Apr 2000 04:00:00

Which card has the best performance in F1 2000 : Voodoo3 3000 vs TNT2
(150/175) ?
My system : Cel550 with 128MB

Thanks,
cj.

Sent via Deja.com http://www.racesimcentral.net/
Before you buy.

Chuck Kandle

F1 2000 : use a TNT2 ot Voodoo3 ?

by Chuck Kandle » Tue, 25 Apr 2000 04:00:00


> Which card has the best performance in F1 2000 : Voodoo3 3000 vs TNT2
> (150/175) ?
> My system : Cel550 with 128MB

> Thanks,
> cj.

> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.

From what I've seen in here combined with my own experience, I'd
strongly suggest the Voodoo3.  Unless you can wait a little longer for
the Voodoo5's. ;-)

--
Chuck Kandler  #70
K&S Racing
http://www.fortunecity.com/silverstone/thepits/195

Competitor in the TopGear MGPRS2 league at:
http://topgear.dhs.org/  Come on & join the fun!

They'll call you names
And spit in your face,
But legends never die.   --Gene Simmons

Jaso

F1 2000 : use a TNT2 ot Voodoo3 ?

by Jaso » Tue, 25 Apr 2000 04:00:00

TNT2 is a way faster card than the V3 3000

> Which card has the best performance in F1 2000 : Voodoo3 3000 vs TNT2
> (150/175) ?
> My system : Cel550 with 128MB

> Thanks,
> cj.

> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.

mas..

F1 2000 : use a TNT2 ot Voodoo3 ?

by mas.. » Tue, 25 Apr 2000 04:00:00


>TNT2 is a way faster card than the V3 3000

First, from reading various benchmarks, that isn't necessarily accurate.

Second, he asked about a specific game where all bets based on a generality as
the above are off.

Third, quoting from Anandtech, a widely cited hardware website:

"Many readers suggested we use flight simulators in addition to our usual set
of first person shooter benchmarks, but from our experiences with flight
simulators, the limiting factor there is CPU  power and not the fill rate of
the video card.

It is for this reason that a TNT2 or Voodoo3 would be just as desirable as a
GeForce to a gamer that only plays flight simulators; you are better off
getting a TNT2 or Voodoo3 and a faster CPU than sheeling out  the big bucks
for a GeForce.

Racing games such as NFS 5: Porsche Unleashed are also not very demanding when
it comes to a video card with high fill rates..."

Now, he might be overstating the case, but I think his general premise that a
CPU investment is a better idea.  As important is the implication that
extrapolating performance from the myriad of First Person Shooter benchmarks
every site uses (which I'm pretty tired of seeing), is specious.

I'm not saying that you won't see a difference between a V3, TNT2, GeForce, or
upcoming V4/5/6.  But that a one-liner saying the TNT2 is way faster is
questionable at best.  Go by the experiences of those in this ng who have
tried both.  From my reading, the voodoo folk seem generally more satisfied
than the TNT'rs with this title's performance.  Though not conclusive.


>> Which card has the best performance in F1 2000 : Voodoo3 3000 vs TNT2
>> (150/175) ?
>> My system : Cel550 with 128MB

>> Thanks,
>> cj.

>> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>> Before you buy.

Iain Mackenzi

F1 2000 : use a TNT2 ot Voodoo3 ?

by Iain Mackenzi » Tue, 25 Apr 2000 04:00:00

That is cetainly arguable, but from my experience of the comments from users
of F12K on this ng, I would say that TNT2 and Geforce don't perform as well
in F12K as V3 3000.
I hope that helps.
Iain


Jaso

F1 2000 : use a TNT2 ot Voodoo3 ?

by Jaso » Tue, 25 Apr 2000 04:00:00

Sorry! I should have provided more info as to why..

I agree with you that CPU investment is a better way of increasing
performance.
When I had a V3 3000 I was playing SCGT a lot and then I replaced it with a
CL TNT2 Ultra and noticed a significant increase in performance when you
have the maximum number of cars on the grid.Although in certain games the V3
would run 10 fps faster than the TNT once you put a few more objects in
front of it it would noticeably slow down where as the TNT2 wouldn't.

I also agree that if you have a half decent system there's currently no real
advantage in getting a higher spec card, I've not seen a great deal of
difference between my Ge-Force DDR and my G400 Max DH.

IMO if you want out and out performance the fastest card I've owned is the
ATI Maxx 64Mb Dual 128Pro's, but I prefer the image quality of the G400.

,Jason




> >TNT2 is a way faster card than the V3 3000

> First, from reading various benchmarks, that isn't necessarily accurate.

> Second, he asked about a specific game where all bets based on a
generality as
> the above are off.

> Third, quoting from Anandtech, a widely cited hardware website:

> "Many readers suggested we use flight simulators in addition to our usual
set
> of first person shooter benchmarks, but from our experiences with flight
> simulators, the limiting factor there is CPU  power and not the fill rate
of
> the video card.

> It is for this reason that a TNT2 or Voodoo3 would be just as desirable as
a
> GeForce to a gamer that only plays flight simulators; you are better off
> getting a TNT2 or Voodoo3 and a faster CPU than sheeling out  the big
bucks
> for a GeForce.

> Racing games such as NFS 5: Porsche Unleashed are also not very demanding
when
> it comes to a video card with high fill rates..."

> Now, he might be overstating the case, but I think his general premise
that a
> CPU investment is a better idea.  As important is the implication that
> extrapolating performance from the myriad of First Person Shooter
benchmarks
> every site uses (which I'm pretty tired of seeing), is specious.

> I'm not saying that you won't see a difference between a V3, TNT2,
GeForce, or
> upcoming V4/5/6.  But that a one-liner saying the TNT2 is way faster is
> questionable at best.  Go by the experiences of those in this ng who have
> tried both.  From my reading, the voodoo folk seem generally more
satisfied
> than the TNT'rs with this title's performance.  Though not conclusive.


> >> Which card has the best performance in F1 2000 : Voodoo3 3000 vs TNT2
> >> (150/175) ?
> >> My system : Cel550 with 128MB

> >> Thanks,
> >> cj.

> >> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> >> Before you buy.

Kieran Larki

F1 2000 : use a TNT2 ot Voodoo3 ?

by Kieran Larki » Tue, 25 Apr 2000 04:00:00

i have a voodoo3 2000 not quite the same but it dosnt preform well in f12000
and it dosnt anti alias

> That is cetainly arguable, but from my experience of the comments from
users
> of F12K on this ng, I would say that TNT2 and Geforce don't perform as
well
> in F12K as V3 3000.
> I hope that helps.
> Iain



> > TNT2 is a way faster card than the V3 3000

Greg Cisk

F1 2000 : use a TNT2 ot Voodoo3 ?

by Greg Cisk » Tue, 25 Apr 2000 04:00:00


Not in F1 2000. Maybe in a vacuum.

--

Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.

cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com


> > Which card has the best performance in F1 2000 : Voodoo3 3000 vs TNT2
> > (150/175) ?
> > My system : Cel550 with 128MB

> > Thanks,
> > cj.

> > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> > Before you buy.

Andrew MacPhers

F1 2000 : use a TNT2 ot Voodoo3 ?

by Andrew MacPhers » Wed, 26 Apr 2000 04:00:00

Can't speak for F1 2000, but I have both cards and you are mistaken in
every other case.

Andrew McP

Jaso

F1 2000 : use a TNT2 ot Voodoo3 ?

by Jaso » Wed, 26 Apr 2000 04:00:00

I Also had both cards and if you read my post 24/04 20:57 you'll see where I
found the difference between them. You'll also see that I did state that
with some games the V3 produced a higher benchmark but when it came down to
greater detail and more objects the TNT2 Ultra didn't take as much of a
performance hit, I take it you have the Ultra version and not the M64 TNT2
which is about as fast as a decent TNT1/Voodoo 2 :) .

I'm not trying to start an argument here as each card has its own merits ,
Voodoo's main one has to compatibility, and at least they'll get into the
32bit colour market with the V4/5's, which with any luck I'll be testing a
V5 5500 next month.


Andrew MacPhers

F1 2000 : use a TNT2 ot Voodoo3 ?

by Andrew MacPhers » Wed, 26 Apr 2000 04:00:00

Having seen the difference I can wholeheartedly say I could live without
32-bit for approximately forever :-) There are times when it's noticeable,
but I'll have a few extra fps rather than a little less dithering in
graduated fills. In fact hardware antialiasing ought to make 32-bit even
less important... It'd be interesting to see some side by side comparisons
between x2/4 16/32-bit

Andrew McP

Jaso

F1 2000 : use a TNT2 ot Voodoo3 ?

by Jaso » Wed, 26 Apr 2000 04:00:00


Lol ! Yeah! I'd have to go along with that one! :O)

lbau

F1 2000 : use a TNT2 ot Voodoo3 ?

by lbau » Thu, 27 Apr 2000 04:00:00

The AA on the new Vodoo cards isn't going to come as free as some people
seem to think. Some of the test results showed pretty severe performance
hits. I wouldn't be surprised if the Nvidia GeForce model
15 doesn't turn out to be better- although not necessariyl for AA.

Andrew MacPhers

F1 2000 : use a TNT2 ot Voodoo3 ?

by Andrew MacPhers » Fri, 28 Apr 2000 04:00:00

I don't think anyone expects them to be free. I expect half frame rates
for x2, quarter for x4. But, for example, I'm flying CH at 1600x1200
pretty smoothly... plenty of room there to swap resolution for aliasing.

The point is that these days cards are capable of some serious fps and,
while I'd like 60fps in everything I play I can live with 25+ if the
tradeoff's worth it. I certainly don't expect FSAA to be practical in
everything though!

Andrew McP


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.