2D video speed- Geforce256 vs Voodoo3 3000

[Kawboy]

This doesn't seem to be a popular subject in reviews, but I always thought that a Geforce was a step up in speed from a V3 3k, not backwards. I upgraded my V3 to a Geforce256 SGRAM a month ago and, while things like Quake III run like a dream, "little" things like desktop scrolling and Diablo II are slower.

I use Wintune98 as a rough guide for things like video and HD speed. Well, these are the numbers it gave me both before and after upgrading my Celeron 466 system with 128 megs. All numbers are done with a desktop size of 1024x768 and 32bit colour. V3 3D results obviously get automatically switched back to 16bpp.

Video megapixels V3 Geforce
per second in

2D 67 49
D3D 22 118
OGL 48 93

The 3D numbers are in the ballpark, but what about 2D? Scrolling web pages with pictures on them is markedly more sluggish now, and playing Diablo II is more sluggish- almost unplayably so in dungeon rooms jam-filled with skeletons, etc. There was nothing of the sort with the Voodoo. The V3 3000 was running the latest drivers and the Asus V6600 Pure 32megger is running Detonator 6.31. OS is Win98 SE.

Does anybody else who has experience with both cards have any feedback? If the Geforce 2D scales with the CPU, my troubles will be over shortly (getting a Pentium III 800E), but for now my upgrade was a step sideways, not up.

Kawboy

 

[Goi]

They should be around the same. I never used Wintune before so I don't know about its benchmark results. Unless you use high resolutions(1600x1200 or more) there shouldn't be much of a difference. I do know that a V3 is quite a bit faster than an original TNT, but I would guess that the GeForce should at least be as fast. I know that ATI cards have always been slightly slower than the rest(3dfx, Matrox, nvidia) at 2D, according to benchmarks anyway.

Edit: Woah, I'm finally Platinum

 

[Priit]

AFAIK 2D quality of V3 is bit better than TnT/TnT2/GForce, don't know about the speed. Diablo2 was originally developed for Glide, so it runs _much_ better with 3dfx cards.

 

[Kawboy]

As far as the 2D quality goes, I find in text and general desktop use that they're virtually identical to each other at least as far up the range as 1024x768. My Samsung 750S does 1280x1024 in 60hz so that rez doesn't see a lot of use. Speed is another thing.

The Diablo 2 thing- I thought it was strictly 2D except for spell effects.

 

[Goi]

How's normal desktop 2D speed? Any differences in speed? At 1024x768 there shouldn't be any noticable speed difference, both should be really really fast unless you have a really slow computer. Its at higher resolutions when cards get sluggish in 2D.

 

[Fozzie]

Are you running the same OS install before and after? Did you switch over to VGA before installing the Geforce? Also I have heard that 3dfx registry settings can really mess with the performance in some cases. Try going through and deleting all 3dfx registry entries.

I went from a V3 2000 to a TNT2 Ultra and took a small noticable hit in 2D performance, but my current Geforce is faster in 2D then the TNT2 was. Honestly though both the TNT2 and the V3 were certainly respectable, faster then a lot of cards I had before.

 

[Kawboy]

There were no OS changes, updates, or whatever. And yes, I changed my settings to VGA, uninstalled the old 3dfx drivers, shut down the computer, swapped cards, and then followed installation directions. After that I followed the precise directions given for updating the Geforce drivers to the latest official reference release (6.31).

Desktop 2D is noticeably slower, though not precisely sluggish. It's just when dragging the scollbar on graphical web pages that I can tell that the Geforce isn't as quick. Text pages still drag quickly enough to be considered instantly refreshed, but that's how quick the V3 dragged graphical pages. A 466 Celeron ain't exactly molasses, so if it wasn't the limiting factor before, unless the Geforce is a fair bit less efficient, it shouldn't be the limiting factor now.

I haven't scanned the registry for any remaining 3dfx entries. I assumed that a proper uninstall would remove all of them. Maybe not...

 

[BFG10K]

I haven't scanned the registry for any remaining 3dfx entries. I assumed that a proper uninstall would remove all of them. Maybe not...

No, you must scan your registry and remove the 3dfx entries. Search for "3dfx", "Voodoo" and "Glide" and remove anything you find. Then search C: for "3dfx*.*", "Voodoo*.*" and "Glide*.*" and delete anything you find. Old registry entries can cause major problems.

On the topic of drivers though, 3dfx's are really quite good, especially for 2D stuff.

 

[Kawboy]

I'll try that and see if it helps. I wonder if doing a fresh reinstall of the geforce drivers after deleting any remaining voodoo references would help? Most likely wouldn't hurt...

 

[oldfart]

3dfx uses a high quality 350 MHz ramdac. The 2D is very good. BTW BFG, I'm impressed!!

 

[BFG10K]

Kawboy:

I wonder if doing a fresh reinstall of the geforce drivers after deleting any remaining voodoo references would help?

The whole idea is to get your system back to the basics before you install your new video card. You shouldn't have any traces of any drivers on your system, and your video card should be set to standard VGA. Then you install the new video card and install the new drivers.

Oldfart:

3dfx uses a high quality 350 MHz ramdac.

Actually the Voodoo3 uses a 300 MHz RAMDAC (according to the box). But it's still very good.

BTW BFG, I'm impressed!!

Well I give credit when its due, and my latest GF2 MX upgrade fiasco showed me a few things about 3dfx which I was ignoring. 3dfx's 2D drivers are excellent quality and stable (so is their hardware), and their 3D drivers are really quite good now as well, especially their Direct 3D drivers.

 

[oldfart]

V3 2K uses a 300 MHz ramdac. V3 3K uses a 350 (a little known fact since most people only think about 3D). Yes, the Voodoos are a bit old, but are very mature. Very good stable drivers. And great 2D quality. You can throw any game you want at a Voodoo3 and it will run.

 

[Goi]

Oldfart's right about the V3 RAMDAC speeds. However, the speed isn't all that matters in image quality, the quality of the RAMDAC, as well as any additional on-board graphics filters, or lack thereof, also affect the image quality too. Since 3dfx manufactures and produces their own chips and boards, they have consistency in their implementation, and fortunately quality is consistently good. In nvidia's case, different board manufacturers may implement boards differently, and many cut corners to save costs.

 

[Doomguy]

NVidia uses just as high of a quality ramdac. Do you really know what you're talking about? The cheap RFI filters on NVidia boards are making the 2d quality bad. Sharkeeper removed the RFI filters on one of his GF2 boards and he said the 2d quality was just as good as any other card he's seen(including the g400). The RFI filters cause problems at high resolution/refresh rates.

 

[BFG10K]

Do you really know what you're talking about?

Of course we know what we're talking about Doomguy. Pointing out nVidia's problems doesn't somehow make us idiots.