rec.autos.simulators

H, Should i buy a Matrox m3d (power vr )  or A Righteous 3dfx, your
opinions on this would be much appreciated.
Cheers
        Scots_man

regards,

Hans-Willem

If you want to play the next generation racing sims, then you
would regret getting a PowerVR card.

Most of the new racing sims are taking advantage of the 3DFX native
mode (Glide), so you have to have 3DFX to utilize these games in their
optimum "Full Glory" mode.

Cheers John Cookson

3DFX  by far

Maybe in native modes the 3DFX would out run the new Rendition chips, but
 that's not something that's been tested. What HAS been tested is Direct3D, and
 the $120 Stealth II outruns the Hercules Stingray 3D in PC Player's real-world
 Direct3D benchmark by about 15%.

Randy
Randy Magruder
Staff Writer
Digital Sportspage
http://www.digitalsports.com/

The Rush chip is about %15 slower for games using Z-buffer and Alpha
Blending simultaneously (like GLQuake), but for Direct3D games its
performance is very similar to the Voodoo Graphics based cards.

--
Eric T. Busch

http://ebusch.akorn.net

Would the Stingray happen to be a rush chip? If so it is hardly
a comparison. Next thing you know someone will say the graphics
in Jetfighter3 suck.
--
Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.

Jeez people, doesn't anyone understand that the two companies aren't
targeting the same audience?  The 3Dfx cards have been and most likely
will continue to be the fastest 3D cards on the market, and thus the
upper level of *** enthusiasts will purchase these cards.  Not
everyone can afford a near $300 3D-only card (yes I know the Voodoo
cards are much cheaper now, but when they were first released over a
year ago they were near $300), so there needs to be another player in
the market.  Rendition has realized this, and thus is targeting their
2D/3D cards at the ATI, S3, etc. owners of the past who were looking for
an affordable all-in-one solution.  They've gone one step further with
the V2100 integrating on the motherboard of OEM systems, to try and
further solidify a position in the low end market.

--
Eric T. Busch

http://www.racesimcentral.net/

Yes but if someone asks...then you have to say 3dfx...why..because its
their money tell them the best and let them decide.

Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand

Show me real games, real frame-rates numbers, and I might get
interested (mildly though, since it is really no great feat to finally
catch up to Voodoo1 12 months after release and just before it is
replaced with Voodoo2).

Joe

OK  does the Stealth 3D outrun a Monster 3D by 15%?  I doubt it.
Interesting how 15% keeps popping up.
--
Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.

Joe

Again your misreading what I've written.  I'm referring to the
performance of Direct3D or Glide titles on a Voodoo Graphics card
compared to their respective performance on a Rush card.  This was to
point out that for those titles not using Z-buffer and Alpha Blending
simultaneously (such as GLQuake), the two cards perform very similarly.
I'm was never comparing Glide and Direct3D titles.

--
Eric T. Busch

http://ebusch.akorn.net

All I was doing was commenting on your assumption that the Rush cards
were slower than the Voodoo Graphics cards (slow enough for you to deem
them not comparable).  Taking away the games that use Z-buffer and Alpha
blending at the same time this simply isn't the case, as Glide and
Direct3D games perform very similarly.  The margin of difference with
those games that do use these features simultaneously is closing, but
yes the Voodoo cards will probably always be faster.

FYI, no one claimed it was 15% faster than the Voodoo Graphics cards.
The earlier post was comparing it to the Rush cards, which would place
it about on par with the Voodoo Graphics cards.

--
Eric T. Busch

http://ebusch.akorn.net