CPR Does Glide=3dfx?

I just bought the Diamond Viper 330, and I'm a little disapointed. Diamond says they will have open GL drivers for win95 soon for this card, but does that mean I will be able to play the "Glide" version of CPR? Is OpenGL the same thing as Glide? Dean, or anybody from the Cart team please let me know if it is worth keeping the Viper or if I need to get a 3dfx card to run the upcoming CART patch? Mike

Quoted text (8 lines)

> I just bought the Diamond Viper 330, and I'm a little disapointed. > Diamond says they will have open GL drivers for win95 soon for this > card, but does that mean I will be able to play the "Glide" version of > CPR? Is OpenGL the same thing as Glide? Dean, or anybody from the Cart > team please let me know if it is worth keeping the Viper or if I need to > get a 3dfx card to run the upcoming CART patch? > Mike

Boot had some very unflattering things to say about the DV330 and it's twin sibling ... you might want to pick up the latest Boot (the one w/the babe on the front) while you can still return your card. Seems they are playing big time games w/the drivers. Could cause you a problem later. Seriously. Doug

Quoted text (8 lines)

>I just bought the Diamond Viper 330, and I'm a little disapointed. >Diamond says they will have open GL drivers for win95 soon for this >card, but does that mean I will be able to play the "Glide" version of >CPR? Is OpenGL the same thing as Glide? Dean, or anybody from the Cart >team please let me know if it is worth keeping the Viper or if I need to >get a 3dfx card to run the upcoming CART patch? >Mike

Mike, OpenGL, Direct 3D and Glide are all different and are called API's. Your Diamond Viper 330 is great for Direct 3D. Once they release OPenGl it will handle that as well. For Glide, or referred to as 3dfx, you will need a 3dfx (Voodoo) card. Monster 3D, Pure3D are 3dfx or Voodoo based cards. Which one? Buy the least expensive one for now since a newer and vastly improved version (Voodoo 2) will be out sometime in the next 5-8 months. Hope that helps.

Quoted text (8 lines)

> I just bought the Diamond Viper 330, and I'm a little disapointed. > Diamond says they will have open GL drivers for win95 soon for this > card, but does that mean I will be able to play the "Glide" version of > CPR? Is OpenGL the same thing as Glide? Dean, or anybody from the Cart > team please let me know if it is worth keeping the Viper or if I need to > get a 3dfx card to run the upcoming CART patch? > Mike

Hello! Glide is the native library for 3Dfx only. Open GL or Direct3D are high level libraries, they will work with your card provided there are drivers to support them. Pascal.

% > % > I just bought the Diamond Viper 330, and I'm a little disapointed. % > Diamond says they will have open GL drivers for win95 soon for this % > card, but does that mean I will be able to play the "Glide" version of % > CPR? Is OpenGL the same thing as Glide? Dean, or anybody from the Cart % > team please let me know if it is worth keeping the Viper or if I need to % > get a 3dfx card to run the upcoming CART patch? % > % > Mike % Boot had some very unflattering things to say about the DV330 and it's % twin sibling ... you might want to pick up the latest Boot (the one % w/the babe on the front) while you can still return your card. % Seems they are playing big time games w/the drivers. Could cause you a % problem later. Seriously. That has always been Diamond's biggest problem. They***around with their drivers, drag their feet fixing them, and generally provide poor support for their hardware. Until they change this track record, I wouldn't buy one of their products (even if it was rated as the cream of the crop by a well respected PC rag). Video cards aren't just hardware anymore and Diamond hasn't shown that they are capable of keeping up on the software side. -- **************************** Michael E. Carver ************************* Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

CPR already takes advantage of your card for hardware acceleration - this is the advantage of D3D (a favorite target ... er sorry ... "topic" ... for ras). While custom api's like Glide may provide slightly better performance on 3dfx cards alone (and yes, I have benchmarks for Glide CPR before anyone jumps in here to "correct" me), they leave all the other card owners (nVidia, Rendition etc) empty-handed. You only have to read the threads regarding lack of 3dfx support for existing popular sims on this NG to see the difference. Writing to D3D allows compatibility for many existing - and future - 3D accelerators, although OEM D3D drivers sometimes take a little while to materialize. D3D has only been around for a short while, and as with any "standard" it takes a while to be fully supported and optimized. As D3D matures (Open GL has been around many more years) it will hopefully become exactly the api the developers want and buyers of 3D accelerators will worry less and less about the compatibility issues you raise here. That's the theory. Printers are a good example of the thinking here - a few years ago getting these devices to work was a nightmare of compatibility. Today noone thinks twice about buying a printer that is not the #1 brand name - they all just work. Stand by for printer tech support flame following this posting!!! - but you see my point I hope. Needless to say, writing to both may be a good solution in the meantime, D3D providing support for the widest range of cards and custom api's for those that desire a few extra fps. Asbestos suit on ...

Thanks for the posting. Asbestos suit wasn't needed at all. This time. As for D3D benchmarks for various cards, it is too early to say for sure - realworld apps tend to stress different areas of functionality than pure benchmarks. The maturity of the drivers is also a critical factor - the hardware may have great potential but if the drivers are immature then this performance will never be realized. Older cards tend to be in a strange middle ground - they are not as "hot" as the latest generation of silicon but they have tested and optimized drivers. Did I avoid answering your question successfully? ; )

Quoted text (10 lines)

><snip> >Amen ! This is actually one of the only time I am replying to Dean and not >flaming CART:PR ;-) >Direct3D is IMHO the way to go. 3D accelerator cards will not do the same >thing as sound cards. The 3dfx technology will not win like Creative did >with their SoundBlaster sound technology. OpenGL and Direct3D will win the >war I hope, not because it's the best solution, but because it reaches the >most game users around the planet. And because Microsoft has the Ca$h to

put

Quoted text (8 lines)

>Direct3D (and DirectX also) into the games. I will have a STB Velocity 128 >AGP on my next PC (Dell 300mhz, the Pc of 1997 and the best video card of >1997). I think it's unfair to see that somes games go with the 3dfx >technology when they could do their games for better cards like my one >(nVidia chip). >3dfx users are kinda "snobbish". They think that they are masters of the >*** world because it looks great on theirt PC's. Remember that

GPLegends

Quoted text (28 lines)

>will be D3D, not 3dfx. JediKnight also is D3D. (plenty of <snipped> games >also). >I just hope that the best technology will win. And that us, the customers, >will be the REAL winners. But IMHO D3D or OpenGL out good into everynbody. >Make Microsoft happy. Make 3dcard companies happy 'cause they don't have to >worry about the compatibility. Make gamers happy because they will not have >to worry about WITCH technology to get (3dfx/Rendition/nVidia). >Btw Dean, is it real (I heard of that) that the STB nVidia Velocity AGP has >the best DirectX Benchmarks on the market presently ??? >With great respect, >May the downforce be with you, >Good race at the Brickyard, (-o-) >Fran?ois Mnard, "ymenard" on NROS >Team member, Zombie Entreprise >Sponsored by AWPSS, http://www.awpss.com/ >SimRacing director, AWPSS >Official PR, AWPSS >Director, The SimRacing Hall-of-Fame >Co-director, Light-Speed >- *Excuse me for my poor English(I'm French speaking) * - >.

OPENGL is another graphics API like Microsofts Direct3D (D3D) and 3dfx's GLIDE. There is an OPENGL driver available for Win95 that allows owners of 3dfx cards to play the game Quake at a very high graphics quality level. This driver was produced as a collaborative effort between 3dfx and ID Software. This driver implements only a subset of the OPENGL API which is required to support GLQuake in Win95. What they mean when they say an OPENGL driver is in development for the Viper (Riva 128) card, is that GLQuake will soon be able to run on a Riva 128 based card. GLIDE is a *** API which is native to the 3dfx Voodoo Graphics and Voodoo Rush chipset 3D cards. Games developed with this API tend to be very spectacular and can only be used on 3dfx equipped cards. Microsofts Direct3d supports most modern 3D graphics cards and is somewhat generic in nature. Games written for this API tend to run slower and tend to be less spectacular than GLIDE or OPENGL. This is because the Direct3D programming environment is not optimized to take advantage of any specific 3D card architecture. I hope this clears up the confusion Now go get that 3dfx card (But avoid the 2D/3D combo cards which use the Rush chipset). Cheers John Cookson (Canada)

<snip> Amen ! This is actually one of the only time I am replying to Dean and not flaming CART:PR ;-) Direct3D is IMHO the way to go. 3D accelerator cards will not do the same thing as sound cards. The 3dfx technology will not win like Creative did with their SoundBlaster sound technology. OpenGL and Direct3D will win the war I hope, not because it's the best solution, but because it reaches the most game users around the planet. And because Microsoft has the Ca$h to put Direct3D (and DirectX also) into the games. I will have a STB Velocity 128 AGP on my next PC (Dell 300mhz, the Pc of 1997 and the best video card of 1997). I think it's unfair to see that somes games go with the 3dfx technology when they could do their games for better cards like my one (nVidia chip). 3dfx users are kinda "snobbish". They think that they are masters of the *** world because it looks great on theirt PC's. Remember that GPLegends will be D3D, not 3dfx. JediKnight also is D3D. (plenty of <snipped> games also). I just hope that the best technology will win. And that us, the customers, will be the REAL winners. But IMHO D3D or OpenGL out good into everynbody. Make Microsoft happy. Make 3dcard companies happy 'cause they don't have to worry about the compatibility. Make gamers happy because they will not have to worry about WITCH technology to get (3dfx/Rendition/nVidia). Btw Dean, is it real (I heard of that) that the STB nVidia Velocity AGP has the best DirectX Benchmarks on the market presently ??? With great respect, May the downforce be with you, Good race at the Brickyard, (-o-) Fran?ois Mnard, "ymenard" on NROS Team member, Zombie Entreprise Sponsored by AWPSS, http://www.awpss.com/ SimRacing director, AWPSS Official PR, AWPSS Director, The SimRacing Hall-of-Fame Co-director, Light-Speed - *Excuse me for my poor English(I'm French speaking) * -

People must note that Rendition cards have much better picture quality than all of these!!! =) Right, Dean (please say "yes"!!!)? Loren Team SAVATS

How about (God forbid) taking advantage of what the 3dfx can actually do???!?! Yeah, and look where the D3D got CART- no excuses, MS, as usual, writes non-optimized shit. Look at F1RS for proof GL is better. If that were the case, we'd all be using OS/2 (or Macs) and betamax VCRs. Don't hold your breath, what makes the most $$ for Bill and Intel is all that matters. They don't give a shit if it's slow, that's what the next Intel CPU is for. ***on any Microsoft "standard" they choose to foist upon us. You never win when MS is your OS.

>Direct3D is IMHO the way to go. Not if developer's want my money, it isn't. I don't want to suffer inferior graphics and frame-rates just so the developer can reach more users with a "lowest common denominator" solution like D3D. Joe

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Or something. UnserFan1 wrote in article

D3D in current form is most definitely _not_ the way to go. It is a lowest common denominator solution, which serves to ensure that my "twin Voodoo2 SLI supersystem" has to suffer the same features as someone who dropped their xash for a PowerPR. Sorry, but no. Anyone who develops native support for the best card will get my money, and in doing so ensure that games are developed to the highest standard. Remember that any card manufacturer can make a chip based upon Voodoo, Verite, SGS Thomson or whatever, it's still an open market. The fight is between the chipset manufacturers to develop and market the best product in the best manner, and D3d drags 'em all back down to the same level. No thank you. Cheers! John

>Anyone who develops native support for the best card will get my >money, And I could reply by saying that anyone who develops native support for my Riva 128 will get MY money, and a Stealth II owner will say that whoever supports the v2x00 will get HIS money, etc. This isn't in the long term best interests of anyone. There is a very good interview with Brian Hook and John Carmack in the latest boot magazine in which DirectX v. OpenGL v Native is discussed at length. They make a pretty compelling argument for OpenGL. If in fact OpenGL is superior to DirectX and support can be done for the leading chip manufacturers, then that's the way to go. At a certain point, the companies will begin optimizing their chipsets and drivers for that standard API rather than a proprietary API, and the goals of a common API and best-possible hardware performance will begin to converge. I do agree that Direct3D is sort of the least common denominator approach and am not thrilled with that, but I'd rather that than a fragmented market in which developers either have to develop natively to several different board manufacturers or risk cutting out large numbers of customers from their games. Look at where Sierra got by betting on Rendition. When they did so it looked like a good idea: Rendition had the best price/performance ratio and the 3DFX was still a high-end, expensive chip. Then prices fell and memory got cheaper, and the 3DFX suddenly became a mainstream video board instead of a niche board, and Rendition was suddenly behind. All those people who wanted 3DFX NASCAR 2 were left out in the cold on that one, and yet it doesn't help Sierra either because many 3DFX owners will pass on NASCAR 2 simply because it doesn't use their board. No one wins. I respect it when a guy like Carmack who knows the business and knows the APIs says that a common API is the way to go -- he just thinks that it SHOULD be OpenGL and NOT DirectX. Randy

>>Direct3D is IMHO the way to go. >Not if developer's want my money, it isn't. I don't want to suffer >inferior graphics and frame-rates just so the developer can reach more >users with a "lowest common denominator" solution like D3D. Given that there are fast competitors now to 3DFX such as the Riva 128 chipset and the Rendition v2200, my opinion is that I DO want to see a standard API evolve, but everything I've read to date says that's OpenGL. But the reality is that Direct3D is the one everyone has to write to now, so I don't mind 3DFX specific ports as long as there is a Direct3D equivalent so my Riva 128 can still run it. Its these "3dfx-only" games that really bug me. I'd rather buy games based upon content, instead of whether or not they support my card. Randy

>And I could reply by saying that anyone who develops native support >for my Riva 128 will get MY money, and a Stealth II owner will say >that whoever supports the v2x00 will get HIS money, etc. This isn't >in the long term best interests of anyone. But it is in the *short* term interests of anyone who wants the best *** experience possible. And that, clearly, is Glide games on 3dfx. And as a hard-core gamer I don't really care about the long-term - if some other 3d card is so much better than Vodoo (and Voodoo2) that it becomes a suported standard, fine, I'll buy it. Until then I want the best games possible. Joe

snip > Then prices fell and memory got cheaper, > and the 3DFX suddenly became a mainstream video board instead of a > niche board, and Rendition was suddenly behind. All those people who > wanted 3DFX NASCAR 2 were left out in the cold on that one, and yet it > doesn't help Sierra either because many 3DFX owners will pass on > NASCAR 2 simply because it doesn't use their board. No one wins. Guess what, the Nascar2 3Dfx port is on it's way! ;^) l8er ronny -- |\ _,,,---,,_ I want to die like my Grandfather, ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ in his sleep. |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Not like the people in his car, '---''(_/--' `-'\_) screaming their heads off!

>>Anyone who develops native support for the best card will get my >>money, >And I could reply by saying that anyone who develops native support >for my Riva 128 will get MY money, and a Stealth II owner will say >that whoever supports the v2x00 will get HIS money, etc. Read what I wrote - "the best card", not "a 3dFX" or "Stealh II" or whatever. If the card delivers the performance and is marketed well (the other point I touched on) people will buy it in flocks and game developers will follow. Down that road lies the best situation - the best card, sold to the most people, and used to the full extent of it's capabilities. 3dFX is only the current example, Voodoo2 might be the next. Agreed. I would far rather see card manufacturers try to come up to a minimum standard for the API rather than game developers drop down to the standard. That is undoubtedly best for everyone in the long term. At the moment however, a swift glance at CART Precision Racing versus Ubisoft's F1 Racing Simulation will illustrate the problem better than any thousand words of mine. 3dFX did, big time, as did I. I've got a 3dFX board that I'm delighted with, and many many excellent titles, all with 3dFX support. I doubt that I could see games like F1RS, FIFA98, Turok etc look anything like as good as they do currently had 3dFX not won out. That there should be a common API is beyond question, since it takes away the element of risk and ensures that ALL games will be delivered with good support, rather than some with excellent and some with poor. In current form I don't think DirectX is good enough, hence my response to ymenard's e***ment. Whether it is OpenGL or DirectX that wins over is immaterial, I'm primarily looking for quality. I think there's a lot of anti-Microsoft sentiment in the OpenGL argument, rather than purely considering the issues at hand. Cheers! John

>But it is in the *short* term interests of anyone who wants the best >*** experience possible. And that, clearly, is Glide games on 3dfx. >And as a hard-core gamer I don't really care about the long-term - if >some other 3d card is so much better than Vodoo (and Voodoo2) that it >becomes a suported standard, fine, I'll buy it. Until then I want the >best games possible. Agreed. Right now I want 3dFX, since it is the best solution currently available. If Voodoo2 delivers everything it looks set to, I'll buy one of those if the software support is there. I want the very best product I can get, and if that means switching hardware to do so then I'll happily do that. At the same time I also recognise that not everyone can do that (money, knowledge, can't be arsed) so for them I also hope that an OpenGL/D3D/??? API is around that can cope with whatever card they have. I just don't want that API standard to compromise the potential of future software, as we have seen until now with D3D. Cheers! John

Did you download the latest Viper driver from http://www.diamondmm.com?? -Paul

Quoted text (8 lines)

>I just bought the Diamond Viper 330, and I'm a little disapointed. >Diamond says they will have open GL drivers for win95 soon for this >card, but does that mean I will be able to play the "Glide" version of >CPR? Is OpenGL the same thing as Glide? Dean, or anybody from the Cart >team please let me know if it is worth keeping the Viper or if I need to >get a 3dfx card to run the upcoming CART patch? >Mike

>Read what I wrote - "the best card", not "a 3dFX" or "Stealh II" or >whatever. If the card delivers the performance and is marketed well >(the other point I touched on) people will buy it in flocks and game >developers will follow. So you're saying everyone will buy "the" card and other companies should just fold up their tents and go home? F1 Racing won't run on my Stingray 3D with a Voodoo Rush in it. It claims the 3DFX is missing, even though the proper version of Glide is installed and the 3DFX glide samples run just fine. This happened on two entirely different machines so I don't think its me. At any rate, F1 looks a lot cleaner on my Riva 128 in Direct3D than CPR does. I think CPR needs some gamma correction. Even when it looks good, its nearly impossible to see any other drivers in the mirrors or way up ahead. Wonderful for you, but you don't have NASCAR 2 3DFX (at least not yet). That's my point. NASCAR 2 was released a full year ago with Rendition support in it and all that time any NASCAR fan with a 3DFX was forced to run the thing non-accelerated. The same is true for those that have Rendition boards that want to run stuff thats been done for Glide. My point is that you may be happy with the mix you got for your board. You're also just one person. I suggest you read the interview if you can, or I can send the magazine to you. The two guys get very technical over what they ran into trying to do Quake for Rendition, DirectX and OpenGL. Randy

>So you're saying everyone will buy "the" card and other companies >should just fold up their tents and go home? Now Randy, you're putting words in my mouth :) Certainly _I_ will buy "the" card, but others certainly won't (as evidenced by the number of unfortunates still buying the sadder cards on the market). For that reason some form of API is still very much a marketable proposition. Equally, provided that a card can engender sufficient software support and show a clear performance gap to the trailing pack, a market will exist for a top quality "native" product, which also supports the standard API. This is more of a risk, but 3dFX certainly carried it off in the current generation. Flexible, responsive marketing, reacting to market demand and close support with developers - it's certainly possible. I haven't seen the D3D version of F1RS, but I would be happy in speculating that it is eclipsed by the native Glide version both in looks and in frame-rate. That's not to say that the D3D version is bad, quite the oppoiste, just that while owners will be happy they cannot realise the full potential. Actually NASCAR2 3dFX is a matter of indifference to me, since IMO it runs perfectly well without 3dFX and adding 3dFX support will not bring anything for me that I get e***d about. Anyway, please continue... :) I know, and I fully acknowledged that what I said was my personal point of view - I also outlined the contrary viewpoint. You need to consider that the software products that I am interested in are few, and I am quite prepared to make a hardware buying decision based upon the one or two pieces of software I am truly interested in. In this case I bought 3dFX, since neither ICR2 nor NASCAR2 require 3D acceleration IMO. For that reason I plumped for 3dFX, since I believed Rendition would not prevail and future products would be unlikely to be coded only for that card. Take Grand Prix Legends as an example, and assume that the Voodoo2 is the best card by far. I would much rather see GPL coded native "Glide2" and being the best sim possible, than have D3D implemented and allow us all to run at less than it's full potential. That is provided of course that it runs acceptably unaccelerated, or if not that D3D is also available for those with less capable hardware. I generally dislike seeing products I'm interested in being cut back in any way, but it is difficult to generalise on such a subject since everyone and every product has different requirements and expectations. IMO the majority will handle itself, since that's where the money is. I'm looking at the high-end and wanting the best I can find. Sorry Randy, I should have been more specific. I wasn't referring to that discussion, more the D3D/OpenGL debate in general. Among those who are informed the argument is generally made on it's own merits, but when the argument drops down to the newsgroups it mainly seems to be a "bash Microsoft" rant, something I dislike and find tiresome. The interview you referred to was most deciedly not that. Cheers! John

snip > Actually NASCAR2 3dFX is a matter of indifference to me, since IMO it > runs perfectly well without 3dFX and adding 3dFX support will not > bring anything for me that I get e***d about. Anyway, please > continue... :) snip

Quoted text (7 lines)

> I know, and I fully acknowledged that what I said was my personal > point of view - I also outlined the contrary viewpoint. You need to > consider that the software products that I am interested in are few, > and I am quite prepared to make a hardware buying decision based upon > the one or two pieces of software I am truly interested in. In this > case I bought 3dFX, since neither ICR2 nor NASCAR2 require 3D > acceleration IMO.

You mentioned several times that Nascar2 would not require 3D acceleration. What kind of PC are u using??? On my P200, 64MB, Intergraph Intense 3D I still would like to have MORE frames per seconds. Without the Rendition you have to switch off A LOT of details to get a good frame rate... I'm not flaming, just curious! ;^) l8er ronny -- |\ _,,,---,,_ I want to die like my Grandfather, ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ in his sleep. |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Not like the people in his car, '---''(_/--' `-'\_) screaming their heads off!

I think icr2 and n2 have a built in 30 fps limit. Certainly icr2 on my p200/ rendition system time warps if the frame rate goes over 30. It looks smooth as silk but is undrivable in a 'warp 9, mr sulu' kind of way. Non rendition users can get reasonable frame rates with details off on higher processors. If you want to see icr2 do 70 fps (in bursts) try the alt key cheats - I think alt-x gives you the fastest graphics combination and switches off the frame rate/ real time controller. alt-t toggles the limiter and there are various others in the readme file Brian.

Quoted text (15 lines)

>> I know, and I fully acknowledged that what I said was my personal >> point of view - I also outlined the contrary viewpoint. You need to >> consider that the software products that I am interested in are few, >> and I am quite prepared to make a hardware buying decision based upon >> the one or two pieces of software I am truly interested in. In this >> case I bought 3dFX, since neither ICR2 nor NASCAR2 require 3D >> acceleration IMO. >You mentioned several times that Nascar2 would not require 3D >acceleration. >What kind of PC are u using??? On my P200, 64MB, Intergraph Intense 3D I >still would like to have MORE frames per seconds. Without the Rendition >you have to switch off A LOT of details to get a good frame rate... >I'm not flaming, just curious! ;^)

On Tue, 02 Dec 1997 17:34:25 +0100, Ronald Stoehr >You mentioned several times that Nascar2 would not require 3D >acceleration. >What kind of PC are u using??? On my P200, 64MB, Intergraph Intense 3D I >still would like to have MORE frames per seconds. Without the Rendition >you have to switch off A LOT of details to get a good frame rate... I am using a iP225MMX (3x75Mhz), 64Mb 50ns EDO, Intergraph Reactor. I find the frame-rate in NASCAR2 to be perfectly fine, even with the BGN track pack that others have complained of (this is in "non-Rendition" mode). I've never actually measured the frame-rate, since it's a bit of a pain to do in Papyrus sims. I do however "perceive" it to be fine, and when I checked SODA (which I also perceived to be fine) I had 25-30 fps. Pretty acceptable I think. Cheers! John

WHEN they fix all the problems with it. MS HAS the resources to fix it!! But it's all political right now. 3D accelerator cards will not do the same Haha.. Creative is a joke.. OpenGL and Direct3D will win the The "only" why I think it kicks ***on this chipset is because of the "agp" variant.. Where did you get this?? Hmm.. Odd.. I am not "snobbish" as you say. Once you have seen a 3dFX game. You will won't look back!<G> Sure does, but in real life, I have heard there is not the much difference in the forms of PCI to PCI versions. bTW, "do you race with benchmarks?" But, why would one compare a video card from PCI to AGP??? Does NOT makes sense to me. Also, goto the APEX site for CPR, look in the benchmark area. See what card is ahead.. in fps. Granted the STB's drivers are still in "infancy" stages.. Prolly won because of AGP. Don't get me wrong, it's nice card and everything, but don't bet your laurels on benchmarks. take care.. JD ------------------------------------------------------------------ Hungry for NEWSGROUPS??? USE feedME.ORG Read and Post to 30,000 groups through feedME.ORG FREE FREE FREE http://www.feedME.ORG FREE FREE FREE ------------------------------------------------------------------