the Rendition version is an alpha OpenGL port on a beta ICD...
Eric
Eric
/Christer
--
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) )
Comparing apples to oranges is very valid if someone is in a
supermarket wondering what fruit to buy. If I was in the market for a
video card and Unreal was my tipple, all that would matter would be
what was on the screen - it's awful.
Cheers!
John
- Eric
The title of the thread was never in doubt - the Thriller3D is best
for GPL and I bought one for that very reason. The point that was made
was that if GPL is not the only reason for buying a 3D card then a
3dFX may be the better choice, depending upon what you want to run.
3dFX is more widely supported, has a greater user base and for those
reasons generally offers better speed and image quality than a
Rendition card. No matter how keen you are on a card, you have to
accept the shortcomings - if I bought a Rendition card to play GPL
thanks to advice here I'd be pretty hacked off if my other favourite
game Unreal looked like a bag of spanners on it.
Cheers!
John
- Eric
- Eric
> ...and they're not nearly as much fun as a banana.
* No animals were harmed in the making of this e-mail *
> I prefer apples actually, cause oranges are way to messy ;o).
Not if you read what I wrote. I wrote "and _for_those_reasons_ (user
base and wider support) generally offers better speed and image
quality than a Rendition card".
If 3dFX is supported and Rendition is not, I'd guess that the image
displayed on a 3dFX would be better than that on the Rendition, Unreal
being a case in point. If the Rendition is not supported it doesn't
matter how good it could have been had the support been there.
Cheers!
John
The situation is different with Celerons. Apparently these are fast
enough that despite the lack of L2 cache they can run GPL quite well
under most conditions, especially when overclocked, as John Wallace
reports.
Some of our testing suggests that a Celeron which lacks L2 cache may not
work as well when hosting an online race as a machine with L2 cache, but
John Wallace's testing with his Celeron seems to contradict this. I
think we will need more experience in this area to be able to say for
sure.
I have no experience with the new Celerons that have L2 cache, so I
can't say for sure how they will work with GPL. It would seem quite
reasonable to expect that they will work better than the Celerons which
lack L2 cache. Perhaps someone with a Celeron with L2 cache can
enlighten us on how the GPL demo runs on it.
Alison
>- Eric
>>Not if you read what I wrote. I wrote "and _for_those_reasons_ (user
>>base and wider support) generally offers better speed and image
>>quality than a Rendition card".
>>If 3dFX is supported and Rendition is not, I'd guess that the image
>>displayed on a 3dFX would be better than that on the Rendition, Unreal
>>being a case in point. If the Rendition is not supported it doesn't
>>matter how good it could have been had the support been there.
>I have no experience with the new Celerons that have L2 cache, so I
>can't say for sure how they will work with GPL. It would seem quite
>reasonable to expect that they will work better than the Celerons which
>lack L2 cache. Perhaps someone with a Celeron with L2 cache can
>enlighten us on how the GPL demo runs on it.
>Alison
I received my Celeron 300A on Friday to replace my PII233 that I have been
using overclocked to 300MHz/100MHz FSB on an Abit BX6 with a Diamond Monster
3D. I popped it in, set the settings in the BIOS, and it was up and running
at 450MHz with no other tweaks. All I can say it that there is a difference.
Everything runs a bit smoother, and the car seems much easier to control
now. I never thought I had any slowdowns with the PII300, but it does make a
difference. I can imagine the difference will be greater when the full
version is released and a full field of AI cars is present. I may now have
to purchase the Thriller 3D to round everything out!
If anyone is thinking about upgrading their system for a relatively
inexpensive amount, I recommend looking into a BX chipset board like the
Abit BX6 or BH6 and the new Celeron 300A. This is an excellent way to get
the performance of a PII450 for under $200 (price of the chip only). And
most all of the reports I have heard show that people have been very
successful in getting it to overclock (some have even got it to 504MHz!)
Eric Giles
> True, Christer, and they're not nearly as much fun as a banana.
> > I prefer apples actually, cause oranges are way to messy ;o).
> --
> Regards,
> Bruce.
> ----------
First of all my apologies - my last message came across as kinda
dismissive and stronger than I intended. It was 3am, working all day
and I just dashed off a response and headed for bed. Sorry for that.
I believe that no matter how I worded it the facts would remain the
same - on average across the software you can buy today or in the near
future, you will get better framerates or visuals with a 3dFX card
than with any other 3D card. This being due to a large user base and
widespread card specific support. Added to that is the fact that with
a 3dFX card there are only one or two titles in which you will be
unable to get 3D support (e.g. ICR2), whereas with, for example, a
Thriller 3D there are markedly more, including some big ones like
Unreal and QuakeWorld.
The Rendition stuff is very good, that is beyond doubt. However while
it is undoubtedly best for GPL I think that needs to be considered
alongside what else the potential buyer might enjoy - that's the only
point I'm stressing.
Cheers!
John