rec.autos.simulators

Is there a web site for the Canopus card? I'de like to find some more
info on it. Thanks.
--
To all you villans out there I say, knock off all that evil!

The Rusty Wallace Miller Lite stock car, awsome when opened up!
GO#2!

        Mullins Motorsports Inc.
        http://www.***tron.com/~ddmj

Cheers,

    http://www.canopuscorp.com/

Marc

http://www.racesimcentral.net/
--
Doug Wilson

Try http://www.total3d.com or http://www.canopuscorp.com

Ed Douglas

The Rusty Wallace Miller Lite stock car, awsome when opened up!
GO#2!

        Mullins Motorsports Inc.
        http://www.***tron.com/~ddmj

I'd say no.  With the current pricing, the Sierra Screamin3D is
probably the best deal.  If you have a SAM's Club membership you can
pick one up for $169.

--

The IWCCCARS Project: Q & A Representative
http://www.theuspits.com/iwcccars/index.html-ssi
http://userwww.service.emory.edu/~ebusch/

Yes it's slightly superior to the other rendition cards in terms of
Win95 2D benchmarks (only about 10% or so in Ziff-Davis' WinBench 97
Business Graphics WinMarks).  Considering this translates into an even
smaller real-world difference (as benchmarks tend to do), I don't think
it's worth the extra $110.  You also need to keep in mind the lifespan
of these cards.  With the trends in 3D right now, 6-8 months will be
pushing it.  Knowing full well these cards will be out dated by the
upcoming cards using the Rendition V2000 chip, why spend the money on
the Canopus when you can get a card nearly as good for 40% less?  I
think it's throwing money away, as the short term gains just aren't
worth it.

--

The IWCCCARS Project: Q & A Representative
http://www.theuspits.com/iwcccars/index.html-ssi
http://userwww.service.emory.edu/~ebusch/

Eric - I've read that the Canopus is superior for non-game Win95 stuff.
Since most of us don't want to fool with two cards, did you consider that
in your recommendation?

                                                bob

The Rusty Wallace Miller Lite stock car, awsome when opened up!
GO#2!

        Mullins Motorsports Inc.
        http://www.***tron.com/~ddmj

I'm not real sure.  The boards should go into testing before E3, and
perhaps would be ready to ship in the fall.  Again, that's just a
guess.  Rendition is being very quiet about it, and about the only
thing I've gotten out of them is that it should be pretty awesome by
today's PC 3D standards (not a whole lot of help, sorry).

--

The IWCCCARS Project: Q & A Representative
http://www.theuspits.com/iwcccars/index.html-ssi
http://userwww.service.emory.edu/~ebusch/

I have a Total 3D and there are a few more benifits than just the obvoius
spec's You read.

You do get the 3D glasses.  These are very fun, however only the games
supplied with the card use them, and only some of them.  

The Resolutions supported are greater than anything else.  I can run
1280x1024X64K where the other cards stop at 1152x865 and 1024x768. (In High
Color).  and I don't beleive any of the others (CL 3D/ S3D / Reactor ...)
will run over 1152x864 at any color depth.  For most people this is no big
deal cause almost noone runs higher that 1152x864 all the time anyhow.  In
fact, I run 11x8 on a 21" monitor and feel that 12x10 is a little much for
everyday use, though I do use it for some apps.  

Text Quality in Windows is Better in my opinion.  But that's about as
subjective as an opinion can get.  Even though I have seen them Side by
Side It is difficult to say one is superior in picture quality.  

The Tech support at Canopus is * * * * *.  I can't say enough about the
people and response time.  In defense of other brands, I really haven't
seen many substantiated claims of poor service from any of the others
besides Creative (Who just plain sucks on all product support).

My decision was made on Speed more than the bundle and also on the 3D
glasses.  I was switching from a Millennium 4MB and understood I would take
a performance hit in windows and dos.  Cost (Within Reason) was not really
an object.  If it had been $400 I would have tried it.  In Hindsight, at
the current pricing, Having seen 3 other brands in action, I would make the
same decision, but again +/- $100 I can eat.

I feel the Total 3D is a good choice, Your $ have to decide for You.  

Think of it like this.  If you bought a P166 3-4 Months ago, the difference
between a P133 and P166 Chip was about $200-$225.  The performance gain
(for the CPU Only) was about 9% in the real world in application tests.
Did you spend it then?

--

----------------------------------------------------------------
The United States Government allows You to buy
a home and call it your own, as long as You
continue to buy it back from them, each year...

Phil Bower, Micro-Second Computers

I really discount the 3D specs as much of a factor, as they currently
only work with the two bundled games and doubtfully will receive much
support in the future.  The 3D-enhanced games are running at what
appears to be 320x200 resolution.  But because of the way these glasses
work (quickly flipping between slightly different images in the left
and right pane giving the illusion of 3D), it's actually using 640x400
pixels.  Thus for a 3D-enhanced SVGA version (a perceived 640x480) it
would take 1,280x960 pixels.  To do this at a decent framerate just
isn't possible right now with today's hardware.  By the time it is
possible, you'll need a new graphics card and 3D specs anyway.

Your points about the higher resolutions and color depths are well
taken, and admittedly I've glossed over this.  The other Rendition
cards really are not meant for large monitors, and instead are aimed at
the gamer with a 17" or smaller screen.  In these cases,
1024x768x16-bit and below fit the bill nicely.  I would not recommend
the Intense3D, Screamin3D, or 3D Blaster for someone with a 21"
monitor.

--

The IWCCCARS Project: Q & A Representative
http://www.theuspits.com/iwcccars/index.html-ssi
http://userwww.service.emory.edu/~ebusch/