Wondering if you could help me out I have a TNT1 and a voodoo 2, at the
moment though, the voodoo2 seems to be kicking the tnt's a$$ speedwise....do
you know what would be causing this?? Has the AGP aperature size ( or
something like that) got anything to do with it, I have the lastest tnt
drivers....
Thanks in advance!
Here are some generalities...
The TNT's are regarded as being faster at Direct 3D programs.
The Voodoo2 has slightly slower D3D performance, but much better
performance if the program supports Glide, the Voodoo's native API.
The Voodoo2 is less processor dependent than the TNT, so system speed
makes it like a "sliding scale" of performance.
For example, a Voodoo2 will perform better than a TNT on a K6/2 300,
but if you have a Pentium II 400, the TNT will give better results.
I have a P2/400 TNT2, V2, and a K6/2 300 TNT 1, V2.
There are some funky issues with TNT's and the VIA Apollo chipset,
which was used on a lot of the early Super Socket 7 motherboards.
I had a heck of a time with performance on my Epox MVP motherboard
when I installed a TNT.
I finally worked through it with driver experimentation and BIOS
flashes, but the system was never as stable as a Pentium/TNT combo.
The situation seemed video related, too -fine at the desktop, but lots
of crashing when starting up a game that used Direct 3D, etc.
I leave my aperture size at the highest setting I can with my P2 and
TNT2, which is 64meg.
Tim
> >Wondering if you could help me out I have a TNT1 and a voodoo 2, at the
> >moment though, the voodoo2 seems to be kicking the tnt's a$$
speedwise....do
> >you know what would be causing this?? Has the AGP aperature size ( or
> >something like that) got anything to do with it, I have the lastest tnt
> >drivers....
> Can you be more specific as to which games, and your system specs?
> Here are some generalities...
> The TNT's are regarded as being faster at Direct 3D programs.
> The Voodoo2 has slightly slower D3D performance, but much better
> performance if the program supports Glide, the Voodoo's native API.
> The Voodoo2 is less processor dependent than the TNT, so system speed
> makes it like a "sliding scale" of performance.
> For example, a Voodoo2 will perform better than a TNT on a K6/2 300,
> but if you have a Pentium II 400, the TNT will give better results.
> I have a P2/400 TNT2, V2, and a K6/2 300 TNT 1, V2.
> There are some funky issues with TNT's and the VIA Apollo chipset,
> which was used on a lot of the early Super Socket 7 motherboards.
> I had a heck of a time with performance on my Epox MVP motherboard
> when I installed a TNT.
> I finally worked through it with driver experimentation and BIOS
> flashes, but the system was never as stable as a Pentium/TNT combo.
> The situation seemed video related, too -fine at the desktop, but lots
> of crashing when starting up a game that used Direct 3D, etc.
> I leave my aperture size at the highest setting I can with my P2 and
> TNT2, which is 64meg.
> Tim
That depends very much on the ability of the programmers...
On my PIII 500 I also use a TNT and a Voodoo2.
All Papy games work much better on Voodoo cards, because they know better
how to program for Voodoo than for TNT. NFS PU also seems to be a little bit
faster with the Voodoo2, with Rally2k I did not see any difference.
Some older games like Viper, SCGT and Speed Busters look much better with
the TNT, framerates seem not to differ very much.
I had a great time with those 2 cards, because despite all those bugs or
problems after upgrading to new drivers at least 1 of the cards was always
working...
CU
Zolli
