Riva vs Voodoo

With the recent slanging match about these two, I thought I might post my views on this so that hopefully a prospective buyer can make a more informed decision. I've made a little chart describing the more common aspects and from that you can probably work out whats more important to you. In the winner field I have put both cards in if the margin is not so great. Personally if I had the choice again, I'd get a voodoo card. (So you know where I stand) My reason was that some of the aspects that the Riva wins in are not important to me.. such as Integrated 2D/3D, 3D in a window, Resolutions etc and some of the Voodoo were important such as Driver Maturity, Slower CPU, and mainstream factor (larger market share) As far as racing sims go, its a more difficult aspect because all the developers seem to have taken different paths.. Papyrus (Rendition), F1RS (Voodoo, D3D), GP2 (none), CPR (D3D) and the racing games like NFS etc seem to have Voodoo support but at a very expensive cost by way of no***pit views. If anyone thinks I've just got something plain wrong, left something important out, please let me know. Regards, David Feature Winner ------------------------------------------------------------------- Integrated 2D/3D Riva 3D in a window Riva Video Quality Riva, Voodoo Direct3D Riva, Voodoo OpenGL Voodoo, Riva Glide Voodoo Rendition Compatability* Voodoo Slower CPU Voodoo, Riva Faster CPU Riva, Voodoo Driver Maturity Voodoo, Riva Highest Resolutions Riva, Voodoo Texture Memory Limitations Riva Mainstream (Market Share) Voodoo, Riva Cost Riva, Voodoo Games List Voodoo, Riva * Voodoo cards can NOT run Rendition Native games, but you can run both a Voodoo and Rendition based card in the same PC.

I have both... why not have the best of two worlds. Also, I don't like Rendition stuff as much as riva or voodoo. The Riva's 2D speed is unbelievable, and the Voodoo's speed is great in 3D. The only exception is that D3D games look better and run a little smoother on my Riva card. I have a PP200 32m

Yea, you left out one important fact. The Riva uses lower quality textures in order to gain speed. Texture tearing is a common problem on Riva boards. Anyway, Voodoo2 will make all other consumer level 3D cards defunct. -- Nos [This Space Left Intentionally Blank]

That's weird because the Riva cards use mipmaping tricks that sacrifice visual quality for the sake of speed. http://www.bootnet.com/commport/nvidia.html -- Eric T. Busch http://ebusch.akorn.net >The only exception is that D3D games look better and run a little smoother >on my Riva card.

Hi, Please excuse my lack of understanding this term but what exactly is texture tearing? Is it the flashing problem many have spoke of here? Thanks, Mike

I'll add in there that the new Hercules Rendition boards are getting 1st reports of matching or beating Riva's in D3d. That isn't carved in stone yet, but if the V2200 Renditions can match the Rivas, then a V2200/VOODOO combo could be very fast and very compatible..(glide,D3D,RENDITION etc) dave henrie

Quoted text (44 lines)

> With the recent slanging match about these two, I thought I might post my views > on this so that hopefully a prospective buyer can make a more informed decision. > I've made a little chart describing the more common aspects and from that you > can probably work out whats more important to you. In the winner field I have > put both cards in if the margin is not so great. > Personally if I had the choice again, I'd get a voodoo card. (So you know where > I stand) My reason was that some of the aspects that the Riva wins in are not > important to me.. such as Integrated 2D/3D, 3D in a window, Resolutions etc > and some of the Voodoo were important such as Driver Maturity, Slower CPU, > and mainstream factor (larger market share) > As far as racing sims go, its a more difficult aspect because all the developers > seem to have taken different paths.. Papyrus (Rendition), F1RS (Voodoo, D3D), > GP2 (none), CPR (D3D) and the racing games like NFS etc seem to have Voodoo > support but at a very expensive cost by way of no***pit views. > If anyone thinks I've just got something plain wrong, left something important > out, please let me know. > Regards, > David > Feature Winner > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > Integrated 2D/3D Riva > 3D in a window Riva > Video Quality Riva, Voodoo > Direct3D Riva, Voodoo > OpenGL Voodoo, Riva > Glide Voodoo > Rendition Compatability* Voodoo > Slower CPU Voodoo, Riva > Faster CPU Riva, Voodoo > Driver Maturity Voodoo, Riva > Highest Resolutions Riva, Voodoo > Texture Memory Limitations Riva > Mainstream (Market Share) Voodoo, Riva > Cost Riva, Voodoo > Games List Voodoo, Riva > * Voodoo cards can NOT run Rendition Native games, but you can run both a Voodoo > and Rendition based card in the same PC.

On 22 Jan 1998 23:48:16 GMT, "Mikes Designs" >Hi, >Please excuse my lack of understanding this term but what exactly is >texture tearing? Is it the flashing problem many have spoke of here? >Thanks, Mike No, you'll see white lines in the textures. iF22 on my S3 Virge in D3D has it badly while on my 3DFX in D3D it doesn't show tears. -- Nos [This Space Left Intentionally Blank]

Quoted text (10 lines)

>>If anyone thinks I've just got something plain wrong, left something important >>out, please let me know. >>Regards, >>David >Yea, you left out one important fact. The Riva uses lower quality >textures in order to gain speed. Texture tearing is a common problem >on Riva boards. Anyway, Voodoo2 will make all other consumer level 3D >cards defunct.

Thanks, I'll have to look into to the tearing problem some more. Do you know if its easily solved by things like enabling vertical retrace? And yep, it certainly looks like Voodoo2 will be the one. Regards, David

> I'll add in there that the new Hercules Rendition boards are getting 1st reports >of matching or beating Riva's in D3d. That isn't carved in stone yet, but if the >V2200 Renditions can match the Rivas, then a V2200/VOODOO combo could be very fast >and very compatible..(glide,D3D,RENDITION etc) I'd have to agree here, thats certainly the most attractive option for us sim racers. I didn't buy the V2100 cause I had the voodoo and was waiting to see how the V2200 came out. If its D3D is as fast as the Riva and its normal windows 2D is also fast then its something I'll be taking a very close look at. As much as I'd like a Voodoo2 it will be some time before I get one because the initial price in Australia will be to rich for me. I'm hoping that the V2200 will be better in D3D for racing sims that use a***pit than the Voodoo currently is. I base this on the performance hit that CPR had when turning on/off the***pit. Regards, David

nVIDIA's Michael O'Hara says... (in response to boot's RIVA review), <QUOTE> "Auto generation of mipmaps reduces traffic across the PCI bus when textures are actually stored in system memory. This is not the normal scenario. System memory is used for overflow. Having the ability to texture from system memory as well as video memory gives a 4MB RIVA 128 the ability to run the majority of double buffered/z-buffered games in resolutions up to 960x720. Auto-generation of mipmaps is not cheating, it is an optimization that is allowed in the benchmark. Furthermore, _it increases the quality of the rendering_. The flexibility of the RIVA 128 architecture to texture from local or system allows for some nice quality/performance optimizations. Most games that do not generate their own mipmaps will look better when auto-mipmapping is enabled than they would normally. If the application does not want to utilize auto-mipmapping, RIVA 128 provides a means to disable auto- generation of mipmaps." </QUOTE> In short, these "tricks" could also be called "innovations", they are not the standard procedure, and they can be disabled, though I'm doubtful whether any RIVA owner would want to do that. After all, why not utilize one of RIVA's nicest features. For those of you who are willing to give it a try, head to www.riva128.com This site contains several links other to RIVA sites, like Riva Extreme, RivaZone, and Dimension 128. Most of them have some tweaking utilities available in their download sections. With such utility you are able to conveniently adjust the number of generated MIP map levels (0-8). Riva Extreme also contains screenshots from several games and if I recollection serves me right, there was a comparison of visual quality between Riva and Voodoo cards in RivaZone. Zone might be moving or something, so I'm not sure if it's up at the moment, but when it is, check it (as well as other Riva sites) out and see for yourself. Btw, there are some nice demos and patches available for Riva owners. TOCA Riva patch, and Longbow 2 Riva-only D3D patch, to mention a few. --- Antti Markus Peteri "He was a bold man that first ate an oyster." Jonathan Swift (1667-1745) Polite Conversation, Dialogue I

>>Yea, you left out one important fact. The Riva uses lower quality >textures in order to gain speed. This myth was debunked so long ago, I'm surprised anyone is still trying to drag it up. Try to get current, will you? Randy Randy Magruder Contributing Reviewer Digital Sportspage http://www.digitalsports.com

Eric, stop reading boot. Their assessment of Riva is incredibly dated and many of their observations were proven inaccurate within a few days after the magazine hit the stands. Their "mip-mapping tricks" as you so call it are auto-generation of mip maps for various LOD. It is a feature which can be turned on or turned off. You can find the technical discussion about this on nVidia's Technical Page site, and you can find on bootnet's web site the print of the information boot got from nVidia. The 'tricks' as you mention them do NOT sacrifice visual quality. More often than not they are the result of bad (read early/buggy/unoptimized/take your pick) drivers or software that was in pre-release status. The observations made in bootnet led many to believe (incorrectly) that transparency isn't supported by Riva cards (gee that F1RS ghost car sure looks translucent to me!), and that all the textures were grainy etc. There are now several sites where members who have both Monster 3D and Riva cards post side by side 640x480 screen grabs of newer titles to demonstrate that the image quality is virtually identical. Randy Randy Magruder Contributing Reviewer Digital Sportspage http://www.digitalsports.com

>This myth was debunked so long ago, I'm surprised anyone is still >trying to drag it up. Try to get current, will you? Hmmm...I have the January issue of CGW here and they reviewed quite a few 3D cards. They also noted that the cards with the Riva chipset showed tears in the textures. I'd say January is pretty current. Wouldn't you? As an aside, thay did say it may be due to lousy drivers. Perhaps the latest drivers solve the problem. I wouldn't know from first hand experience because I have a Voodoo and in about two months will have a Voodoo2, which a Riva couldn't even hold a candle to. Talk about being current. Why in hell buy a card with over a year old performance spec in comparison to a Voodoo when soon you can get a card that has 2 - 3 times the performance spec. Try to stay on top of the technology instead of being a follower. -- Nos [This Space Left Intentionally Blank]

So you think if he had better facts about the hardware he would magically think the image was better? If he thought it looked like crapola, what does it matter if he got some specs wrong? And BTW, I am assuming you are correct about the specs. He isn't the lone ranger in saying the riva picture quality was inferior. Or do you not realize that? -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. >>Sorry Boot is not the only source for this appraisal of the Riva >>chipset. The latest is Toms Hardware Page www.tomshardware.com in his >>just published extensive 3d card test. Tom was none too impressed with >>image quality on the Riva chipset. >Tom also doesn't have all his facts straight. He says: >"4MB hereof as frame buffer. NVidia's RIVA 128 chip has got a simular >problem, it can't support more than 4 MB onboard memory, >only good for a 3D resolution of maximal 800x600. " >Hilarious considering that I took a break from this message and fired >up the G-Police demo at 1024x768 hardware accelerated with no problems >(and you'll find this resolution tested in many benchmarks of the Riva >chipset, as well). So, I'm sorry Tom was "none too impressed" by the >image quality of the chipset, but I'm also sorry he is uninformed >about the features of the card he's criticizing. >Randy >Randy Magruder >Contributing Reviewer >Digital Sportspage >http://www.digitalsports.com

And I repeat. If he had he facts straight, how does that magically make the Riva image quality better? -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. >>Better run and tell Tom at Toms hardware...he wasnt too impressed with >>the visuals of the Riva in his just published extensive test of 3d >>Cards....looks pretty bad to me to.... >And I repeat...Tom has his facts screwed up, for starters, claiming >that the Riva is limited to 800x600, when I just got done playing >G-Police on it at 1024x768 (I've done the same with FS 98). >Randy >Randy Magruder >Contributing Reviewer >Digital Sportspage >http://www.digitalsports.com

snip > As much as I'd like a Voodoo2 it will be some time before I get one because the > initial price in Australia will be to rich for me. I'm hoping that the V2200 > will be better in D3D for racing sims that use a***pit than the Voodoo > currently is. I base this on the performance hit that CPR had when turning > on/off the***pit. If this would be a big problem with the Voodoo why doesn't it show in F1RS? Sometimes it's just the used 3D engine... ;^) 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!

Sorry Boot is not the only source for this appraisal of the Riva chipset. The latest is Toms Hardware Page www.tomshardware.com in his just published extensive 3d card test. Tom was none too impressed with image quality on the Riva chipset. His verdict....get a Voodoo if your serious about Games....umm where have I heard that before. Pierre

Better run and tell Tom at Toms hardware...he wasnt too impressed with the visuals of the Riva in his just published extensive test of 3d Cards....looks pretty bad to me to.... Pierre

>Sorry Boot is not the only source for this appraisal of the Riva >chipset. The latest is Toms Hardware Page www.tomshardware.com in his >just published extensive 3d card test. Tom was none too impressed with >image quality on the Riva chipset. Tom also doesn't have all his facts straight. He says: "4MB hereof as frame buffer. NVidia's RIVA 128 chip has got a simular problem, it can't support more than 4 MB onboard memory, only good for a 3D resolution of maximal 800x600. " Hilarious considering that I took a break from this message and fired up the G-Police demo at 1024x768 hardware accelerated with no problems (and you'll find this resolution tested in many benchmarks of the Riva chipset, as well). So, I'm sorry Tom was "none too impressed" by the image quality of the chipset, but I'm also sorry he is uninformed about the features of the card he's criticizing. Randy Randy Magruder Contributing Reviewer Digital Sportspage http://www.digitalsports.com

>Better run and tell Tom at Toms hardware...he wasnt too impressed with >the visuals of the Riva in his just published extensive test of 3d >Cards....looks pretty bad to me to.... And I repeat...Tom has his facts screwed up, for starters, claiming that the Riva is limited to 800x600, when I just got done playing G-Police on it at 1024x768 (I've done the same with FS 98). Randy Randy Magruder Contributing Reviewer Digital Sportspage http://www.digitalsports.com

Im not really sure that I give enough of a shit about this to make this point. But here goes...in case it does matter to someone making this decsion.... TOM is NOT the only one saying this..... The Screen Shots do look bad... Voodoo Extreme yea yea I know but the guy there has one on his machine and likes it but admits the image quality is NOT as good as his Voodoo. I really truly dont feel like going and finding all the sites that have run tests that show the image quality is screwed compared to a Voodoo...Why..??? Because I have a Voodoo it makes no difference to me what video card you have. You want a Riva great....have fun. My Voodoo rocks my world...and I havent heard many who have said otherwise about their purchase of a Voodoo. PAPA DOC Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand Infamous Pink Flamingo Pilot...

I don't have the original post, so forgive the quoting. Randy, yes I know that the Riva cards auto-generate mipmaps and I've read their technical discussion page. I'm not sure if that's the underlying cause (NVidia would like you to believe it actually helps), but the fact still remains that the cards image quality is noticeably lower than the other major players (Rendition is tops, followed by 3Dfx). I'll take looks and good speed over great speed any day... -- Eric T. Busch http://ebusch.akorn.net

nothing worth reading. -- Nos [This Space Left Intentionally Blank]

Rendition picture quality speaks for itself! Even with it's first generation V1000-series chips! Loren Team SAVATS PROUD Screamin' 3D owner

>I really truly dont feel like going and finding all the sites that >have run tests that show the image quality is screwed compared to a >Voodoo...Why..??? Because I have a Voodoo it makes no difference to me >what video card you have. You want a Riva great....have fun. My Voodoo >rocks my world...and I havent heard many who have said otherwise about >their purchase of a Voodoo. Well said, Pierre! I was a diehard Rendition fan until about 10 minutes after the shrink wrap came off the box of my Diamond Monster 3D. My Voodoo rocks my world, too! Eagle Woman Remove the spam blocker NOSPAM to email me. http://www.nh.ultranet.com/~alison

In everything but ModeX VGA you wouldn't notice the difference... -- Eric T. Busch http://ebusch.akorn.net > 2D performance? RIVA beats Millenium II at 2D :) This is still an >issue too!

snip snip <EBG> snip Got to throw in something here I follow your point Randy, and it`s a good one, but I feel that you may be overlooking the point that you have a very powerful CPU to back up your Riva. If we look Tom`s numbers and assumes that they are reasonably correct (he DOES know a thing or two about computers after all), the thing that strikes me is that unless you have a P200MMX or above you MAY actually run D3D faster with a 3Dfx board. I did some tests with GLQuake myself, and the great thing about the 3Dfx is that it is not very CPU dependant (if you have an Intel :-), if I ran a P100 or a P200 or my brand new PII :-); not that much of a difference in performance, so if you have a low end PC I would say the choice IS very clear (Unless you plan to run Papy/Sierra games of course :-). Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy (looking for the mailman with my brand new Diamond Viper 330 in his bag)

>So you think if he had better facts about the hardware he would >magically think the image was better? If he thought it looked like >crapola, what does it matter if he got some specs wrong? And >BTW, I am assuming you are correct about the specs. He isn't >the lone ranger in saying the riva picture quality was inferior. >Or do you not realize that? He's also far from unopposed on this issue. I brought to light his factual inaccuracies lest those people that want to quote him as if he's the biblical reference on 3D sources also realize he's not infallible. Again, I'll state, in many cases where the image quality is markedly inferior, other people who use a different nVidia board with different drivers observe an improvement in quality. Unfortunately, I can't use a Diamond Viper's drivers on my STB Velocity, so I still have some problems with some games (such as CPR), but the drivers are still being brought along and bugs (including those which affect image quality) are being ironed out. I do not deny there have been image quality problems. But I will say that those that love to claim that its the CHIPSET and is therefore unfixable are being routinely proven wrong as software patches from the game developer as well as new drivers demonstrate that the problem was in software all along. Randy Randy Magruder Contributing Reviewer Digital Sportspage http://www.digitalsports.com

>If we look Tom`s numbers and assumes that they are reasonably correct >(he DOES know a thing or two about computers after all), the thing that >strikes me is that unless you have a P200MMX or above you MAY actually >run D3D faster with a 3Dfx board. This may be true, or it may not be. I've seen so many conflicting views and benchmarks on this I've given up trying to draw a definitive conclusion. I don't have the means to test it myself. Randy Randy Magruder Contributing Reviewer Digital Sportspage http://www.digitalsports.com

>And I repeat. If he had he facts straight, how does that magically make >the Riva image quality better? >-- Credibility of the witness your honor :). Many of the problems reported as "hardware" problems and "unfixable" were absolutely the opposite (the Jedi knight transparencies stand out as one that was easily blown away just by a patch of the game coming out). I don't have a beef with those people that say that Board XXYYZZ with recent drivers have image quality problems on such-and-such a game. But when you're just going to say "its the hardware's fault and the hardware sucks", without any technical background to claim that, then it irritates me. And I'm not inconsistent here. If the first Voodoo2 optimized drivers are awful and have crappy image problems, i'm not going to come on here and say that it must be crappy Voodoo2 hardware. I'll blame the most likely culprit first: The software/drivers. Randy Randy Magruder Contributing Reviewer Digital Sportspage http://www.digitalsports.com

The results of these "image quality" tests are so uneven as to be highly dubious at best. You simply cannot ignore the issue of driver maturity when judging this, particularly when early problems that resulted in lower image quality were ironed out in driver updates and software updates. Randy Randy Magruder Contributing Reviewer Digital Sportspage http://www.digitalsports.com

OK I understand your rationale about drivers. And I do agree (hey a first!). However, the problem is then the driver writers. Obviously for whatever reason 3dfx has this driver thing solved. Re: voodoo2? You are correct. Their initial drivers may well suck. That is why I am going to wait for firm reports of backwards computability with existing 3dfx programs before I make the leap. A notorious example of superior hardware being defeated by poor drivers is the GUS. Everyone will agree that hardware wise it was a much superior soundcard (for it's time). But lack of solid DOS drivers (and W95 I believe) doomed the card to be a laughing stock. Just a thought :-) -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. >>And I repeat. If he had he facts straight, how does that magically make >>the Riva image quality better? >>-- >Credibility of the witness your honor :). Many of the problems >reported as "hardware" problems and "unfixable" were absolutely the >opposite (the Jedi knight transparencies stand out as one that was >easily blown away just by a patch of the game coming out). I don't >have a beef with those people that say that Board XXYYZZ with recent >drivers have image quality problems on such-and-such a game. But when >you're just going to say "its the hardware's fault and the hardware >sucks", without any technical background to claim that, then it >irritates me. And I'm not inconsistent here. If the first Voodoo2 >optimized drivers are awful and have crappy image problems, i'm not >going to come on here and say that it must be crappy Voodoo2 hardware. >I'll blame the most likely culprit first: The software/drivers. >Randy >Randy Magruder >Contributing Reviewer >Digital Sportspage >http://www.digitalsports.com

> Rendition picture quality speaks for itself! Even with it's first generation > V1000-series chips! > Loren > Team SAVATS > PROUD Screamin' 3D owner How can somebody be PROUD of a graphics card? You may like it, even love it, but be PROUD of it? Geeez! BTW, I've got an Intense 3D and a M3D, and I likem both! ;^) 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!

> >Hmmm...I have the January issue of CGW here and they reviewed quite a > >few 3D cards. > Ahh, CGW. Home of the 5 star rating for CPR (listening to newsgroup > giggle). Hehehehehehehehe. Make that hysterical fits of laughter :)

> I'll add in there that the new Hercules Rendition boards are getting 1st reports > of matching or beating Riva's in D3d. That isn't carved in stone yet, but if the > V2200 Renditions can match the Rivas, then a V2200/VOODOO combo could be very fast > and very compatible..(glide,D3D,RENDITION etc) > dave henrie 2D performance? RIVA beats Millenium II at 2D :) This is still an issue too!

>The results of these "image quality" tests are so uneven as to be >highly dubious at best. You simply cannot ignore the issue of driver >maturity when judging this, particularly when early problems that >resulted in lower image quality were ironed out in driver updates and >software updates. So you're saying we shouldn't buy a Riva card because the drivers are crap? Thx for the tip, I'll keep it in mind. -- Nos http://www.cris.com/~nosfer/index.html

> I don't >have a beef with those people that say that Board XXYYZZ with recent >drivers have image quality problems on such-and-such a game. But when >you're just going to say "its the hardware's fault and the hardware >sucks", without any technical background to claim that, then it >irritates me. Did I not say the drivers may be to blame? Do I have to go find the quote for you? -- Nos http://www.cris.com/~nosfer/index.html

>So while a voodoo can display a***pit view in F1RS at a good framerate, I just >think that the voodoo takes a performance hit for having one. It is normal for flightsimulators to take a framerate hit with the***pit on. I don't think this is a 3dfx problem as this "feature" has been around for years. It was first noticed in US Navy Fighters where there was a toggle for the***pit. Surprisingly framerate went up when there was no***pit and more to draw/render. It never made sense to me but that is how it is :-) Also there is a view to shut off the***pit in F1RS. I think you get it by cycling F3 or F4.... -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.

Uh I hate to point this out cause really this is of no importance to me...but even you have stated that visual quality is affected. You blame underdeveloped drivers...others blame the hardware. Either way a person is currently screwed....well ok if they have a Voodoo they are doing fine....hehe. Pierre

Quoted text (13 lines)

> >snip > >> As much as I'd like a Voodoo2 it will be some time before I get one because the > >> initial price in Australia will be to rich for me. I'm hoping that the V2200 > >> will be better in D3D for racing sims that use a***pit than the Voodoo > >> currently is. I base this on the performance hit that CPR had when turning > >> on/off the***pit. > >If this would be a big problem with the Voodoo why doesn't it show in > >F1RS? > I think it does, if you compare framerates against pod, F1RS loses quite a few. > Also when viewed from behind the car it is a bit quicker.

You're comparing frame rates of arcade and sim!? There are quite a few cpu cycles spent on car physics, you know? I only spent maybe 5 seconds in the behind the car view, so I can't tell... ;^) 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!

On Sun, 25 Jan 1998 09:29:27 -0600, "Greg Cisko"

Quoted text (7 lines)

>It is normal for flightsimulators to take a framerate hit with the***pit >on. I don't think this is a 3dfx problem as this "feature" has been around >for years. It was first noticed in US Navy Fighters where there was a >toggle for the***pit. Surprisingly framerate went up when there was >no***pit and more to draw/render. It never made sense to me but >that is how it is :-) Also there is a view to shut off the***pit in F1RS. >I think you get it by cycling F3 or F4....

Hornet Korea is a good example. Very detailed***pit runing great on a 3DFX. -- Nos [link lost in import: /~nosfer/index.html]

Quoted text (11 lines)

>>So while a voodoo can display a***pit view in F1RS at a good framerate, I >just >>think that the voodoo takes a performance hit for having one. >It is normal for flightsimulators to take a framerate hit with the***pit >on. I don't think this is a 3dfx problem as this "feature" has been around >for years. It was first noticed in US Navy Fighters where there was a >toggle for the***pit. Surprisingly framerate went up when there was >no***pit and more to draw/render. It never made sense to me but >that is how it is :-) Also there is a view to shut off the***pit in F1RS. >I think you get it by cycling F3 or F4....

While I believe you, I really don't understand it either, in the old school you draw the***pit once and just clip around it.. maybe PCI or VLB moved the bottleneck to the CPU??? Yeh you can get the Psygnosis over the front view with F4 and it seems a fair bit faster, but I really prefer the***pit view. Regards, David

ROFL!!! =) Rendition FOREVER!!! Loren Team SAVATS

Is there an In-Car view in Pod? I thought it was all outside? And how do you get framerates for the above games? I found out ho with Moto Racer, but I wasn't aware of a way to get framerates for F1RS and POD.

>OK I understand your rationale about drivers. And I do agree >(hey a first!). However, the problem is then the driver writers. >Obviously for whatever reason 3dfx has this driver thing solved. If nothing else, the 3DFX has been around a lot longer, and even where there are driver problems, most of the game makers now know enough about how to work around them and code for either driver/hardware limitations. Whereas with the Riva boards, they are just exposing a lot problems in D3D (which I agree it has -- particularly if you consider how many problems show up in CPR with WHQL certified drivers!) I don't know if I'll wait that long. If I were to buy a M3D now it would be for compatibility and stability purposes, not image quality or speed. Randy

>>I think it does, if you compare framerates against pod, F1RS loses quite a few. >>Also when viewed from behind the car it is a bit quicker. >Is there an In-Car view in Pod? I thought it was all outside? No incar Don't know, I've been using my own guestimates I dont think you can... (Below isn't directed at you personally, but for anyone who might not understand what the hell I'm going on about) I was just saying that in my opinion there was a reduction in F1RS framerate compared to POD. This isn't a bad thing just something that seems to happen. I'm just questioning whether the framerate drop is because of the***pit view (which I am grateful for) or not and if it were the***pit view would it be less on a Rendition V2200 card. I'm not complaining, I'm just trying to understand. As far as I'm concerned the F1RS***pit view framerate is quite good. The Voodoo is king for 3D games, but is it possible that the V2200 is actually the better card for***pit view racing sims? Thats all I'm trying to find out. Because if it is, then I'd stick one beside my Voodoo. Regards, David

Quoted text (16 lines)

>> >snip >> >> As much as I'd like a Voodoo2 it will be some time before I get one because the >> >> initial price in Australia will be to rich for me. I'm hoping that the V2200 >> >> will be better in D3D for racing sims that use a***pit than the Voodoo >> >> currently is. I base this on the performance hit that CPR had when turning >> >> on/off the***pit. >> >If this would be a big problem with the Voodoo why doesn't it show in >> >F1RS? >> I think it does, if you compare framerates against pod, F1RS loses quite a few. >> Also when viewed from behind the car it is a bit quicker. >You're comparing frame rates of arcade and sim!? There are quite a few >cpu cycles spent on car physics, you know?

Thats true, I guess I shouldn't be.. The reason I did was because F1RS used the POD graphics engine. Well if there wasn't a***pit view, I'm pretty confident I'd be driving GP2 :) Regards, David

>The results of these "image quality" tests are so uneven as to be >highly dubious at best. You simply cannot ignore the issue of driver >maturity when judging this, particularly when early problems that >resulted in lower image quality were ironed out in driver updates and >software updates. Sorry to drag this issue up again, but I was justover at Toms Hardware http://www.tomshardware.com/3dbench2.html and had a look at the 3D benchmarks page. All I can say now is, read it and weep. The Riva isn't any competition to a 3DFX card. I was under the impression it was as fast as a 3DFX card. I was wrong. For consumer level boards it's still king over a year after it's release. -- Nos http://www.cris.com/~nosfer/index.html

>Btw, I'm picking up a Monster 3D second-hand for just $75. Couldn't >resist the price and at least it will let me run F1RS and see whether >its significantly better with the 3DFX. I have no interest in Yes it will :-) BTW, I'm not threatened by the RIVA in the least. -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.

>Sorry to drag this issue up again, but I was justover at Toms Hardware >http://www.tomshardware.com/3dbench2.html and had a look at the 3D >benchmarks page. All I can say now is, read it and weep. Oh yeah, I'm cryin' now. Do you really want me to go and scare up all the other benchmarks that show the Riva winning? What would that prove? FUD, FUD and more FUD. Btw, I'm picking up a Monster 3D second-hand for just $75. Couldn't resist the price and at least it will let me run F1RS and see whether its significantly better with the 3DFX. I have no interest in promoting Riva, but the VoodooZealots definitely seem to feel threatened enough by it to make it the single "board to bash" of choice. Randy Randy Magruder Contributing Reviewer Digital Sportspage http://www.digitalsports.com

>Oh yeah, I'm cryin' now. Do you really want me to go and scare up all >the other benchmarks that show the Riva winning? What would that >prove? >>The Riva isn't any competition to a 3DFX card. You would be comparing an AGP Riva to a PCI Voodoo if you did that so it wouldn't be valid anyway. What the *** does that mean Mr.***wad? -- Nos [link lost in import: /~nosfer/index.html]

>You would be comparing an AGP Riva to a PCI Voodoo if you did that so >it wouldn't be valid anyway. Where can I get an AGP voodoo? Oh..namecalling. How scary. I bet you stayed up all night thinking up that name for me. Yes, you succeeded. Your childish namecalling has scared me into silence, because I'm just so incredibly awed by the intellect that could come up with the clever tactic of namecalling. Randy Randy Magruder Contributing Reviewer Digital Sportspage http://www.digitalsports.com

Quoted text (13 lines)

> >You would be comparing an AGP Riva to a PCI Voodoo if you did that so > >it wouldn't be valid anyway. > Where can I get an AGP voodoo? > >>FUD, FUD and more FUD. > >What the *** does that mean Mr.***wad? > Oh..namecalling. How scary. I bet you stayed up all night thinking > up that name for me. Yes, you succeeded. Your childish namecalling > has scared me into silence, because I'm just so incredibly awed by the > intellect that could come up with the clever tactic of namecalling.

Hey, he does it all the time in c.si.p.g.f., why should he stop doing it in r.a.s.... ;^) 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!

On Mon, 02 Feb 1998 13:38:35 +0100, Ronald Stoehr >Hey, he does it all the time in c.si.p.g.f., why should he stop doing >it in r.a.s.... ;^) I don't think so. I just don't like the snotty nosed snobs in this group so anything to***them off is a good thing in my books. Noticed I never replied to his post? I'm no longer interested in him or his views. He can say whatever he likes about me, you included, and I couldn't give a shit. -- Nos [link lost in import: /~nosfer/index.html]

Premature test... Keep in mind that the RIVA 128 doesn't even have a BETA Open GL driver available yet!!!! So this comparison is between a card that's been on the market for over a year, and had plenty of time to have the kinks worked out, and a card that's new to the market... There will be a BETA Open GL driver available in a week or two, so hopefully Tom's site will do another review at that time. Don't count the RIVA out yet!

Ooops...shit Tom did a review of Voodoo 2....oops....hehehehe. Can you say real real real fast.......oooooh I think you can.... PAPA DOC Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand Infamous Pink Flamingo Pilot...