3dfx.com shuts down today. (2/19/02)

[kazeakuma]

Bye bye 3dfx.

As people say they screwed up on the management side not the hardware side. And the VSA-100 chip was very ambitious in terms of hardware features for it's time. It had a hardware AA algorithm which is still one of the best today, motion blur, depth of field and more things courtesy of the T-Buffer. If the V5 had released on time maybe we would have seen some of this in games today. And the Q3 Motion Blur test is very pretty and is enjoying it's place on my hdd.

But times change and we gotta move on. The march of progress people!

 

[cbuchach]

I do have to agree with the great stability of 3dfx cards. I had my Banshee for well over two years. Its drivers were vastly superior to the current crap I am still dealing with with ATI. My Banshee never ever crashed my system which I really can't say for my current Radeon.

 

[spanky]

I paid $320 for a GF2GTS in April 2000 and it delivered ~3000 in 3DM2K1. The GF3Ti200 I got in Nov. 2001 cranked out ~5500 and cost me $150! In less than 2 years, I was able to nearly double my performance for less than HALF the price!

back then... purchasing the gts was the same as purchasing the ti500 a few months back. that would cost u $300+ as well. please compare apples to apples next time. well u think 3dfx and ati sucks... good for you. just becuz other ppl like 3dfx or ati does not mean they hate nvidia. you should cut down on terms like "ati fanboy" or "nvidia haters".

 

[DefRef]

My point was that what was once TOP of the line is now easily trumped by the next generation's BOTTOM of the line. It's about to happen again with the GF4 4200 laying the smack down on the Ti500. The new $200 card is what the old $400 card was...after only 6 months!

Sorry, but the tenor of much of 3dfx and ATI fanboy rhetoric IS based on Nvidia hate, most of the time. When you see posts bragging about the superior 2D, then it's clear that they're clutching. Remember waaaaaaaay back in Fall 1998 when the TNT came out. The pregame hype was that it would equal SLIed V2s in speed and they had to drop the clock speeds from the advance promises. The Zombies just hooted and hollered and flamed that Nvidia had lied and they suck and 3dfx ownz j00 and felt real good about themselves. They then sat back and yapped and talked trash until 3dfx was bought up and shut down by Nvidia. Even THEN, they still yapped, "Rampage would've been great!"

Yeah, right, whatever. So would the Kyro III and the BitBoys Glaze3D and...

 

[sandorski]

DefRef: Boohoo. Play with fire, you'll get burned.

 

[Rand]

<<
Sorry, but the tenor of much of 3dfx and ATI fanboy rhetoric IS based on Nvidia hate, most of the time. When you see posts bragging about the superior 2D, then it's clear that they're clutching.
>>



Well this supposed "fanboy" never even mentioned 3dfx's 2D in my post. In fact their 2D is hardly a reason why I always thought highly of 3dfx.
If one wanted 2D at the time of 3dfx they could go to Matrox, they could offer better 2D then 3dfx and decent gaming performance at the time. ATi was also around.. though their cards werent terribly good for the gamer they were at least decent and offered 2D that was fairly close to that of 3dfx if not quite on par.

Also, I don't see it as 'clutching desperately' if people lament on 3dfx's excellent 2D visual quality.... if your happy with nVidia then I'm happy for you. But like it or not, amny of us are not happy with the majority of nVidia graphics boards in terms of 2D visual quality.
Some of us care quite a bit about 2D visual quality, some of us can see a difference between Matrox and nVidia, or ATi and nVidia.... it doesnt make us fools, nor does it make us 'desperate' to find anything bad about nVidia.



<<
Even THEN, they still yapped, "Rampage would've been great!"
>>



I don't believe I've ever uttered those words in my life, and frankly I havent heard many others say anything like that in the past few months either... no one in this thread has yet mentioned Rampage besides you.
To be honest, what Rampage might have been is a pointless debate IMHO.
It's never going to see the light of day, and all we ever really had was extremely vague rumored specifications so we have extremely little to base any decisions on.



<< The Zombies just hooted and hollered and flamed that Nvidia had lied and they suck and 3dfx ownz j00 and felt real good about themselves. >>



I'm such an ignorant 'fanboy and zealot' for 3dfx that I'm running an NVIDIA graphics card right now. I'm such an ignorant fan boy that I've owned more NVIDIA graphics card then I have 3dfx boards.

If I'm a 3dfx fanboy for purchasing what I believe is best suited for my particular needs then I am wholeheartedly glad I'm a fanboy. My 3dfx fanboy attitude evidently led me to choose nVidia. My 3dfx fanboy'ism has lead me to choose cards from Trident, Matrox, 3dfx and ATi in the past.
I purchase what I feel is the best solution for my needs at my favored price point which historically has been about $230 Canadian.
If that means I've purchased two 3dfx products (Banshee and V3) in the past because I felt they were the best cards available for my needs then I'm not about to apologize for it.

There are 3dfx fanboys out there, and they are as irritating as you've indicated, but there are also nVidia fanboys around, and ATi fanboys, and PowerVR fanboys.
To be honest, I'd say both 3dfx and nVidia fanboys are the worst. I find them considerably more irritating them the majority of the ATi/PowerVR fanboys or anyone else out there.

BTW: One last comment, 3dfx 2D wasnt always good. I still maintain that the original 3dfx Voodoo Rush had the single worst 2D core of ANY graphics card manufactured since 1995.

 

[Deeko]

DefRef, DefRef, DefRef. You come in here ranting of fanboyism, but you are being by far the biggest fanboy in this thread. And you are just saying 2D doesn't matter cuz nvidia's 2D sucked so bad. I personally don't like blurry monitors when I'm not playing games....

 

[DefRef]

Neither would I, but I have NEVER had a problem with 2D quality with ANY of the FIVE Nvidia-based cards (TNT thru GF3), made by FIVE different makers (STB, Diamond, CL, ASUS, PNY). I run at 1600x1200x32 and stare at this monitor a MINIMUM of 4 hours a day and if the quality was as bad as y'all keep whining about, I'd be dictating this to my leader dog, wouldn't I?

I wasn't referring to anyone in particular in this thread with my mentions of what fanboys have said in the past, so I find it interesting and amusing that everyone seems to be taking these anecdotes so personally. When you're feeling picked on when no one's talking about you, it may be time to get your medication adjusted.

BTW: I'm NOT an Nvidia fanboy. I've been critical of their confusing naming strategy (i.e. The GF4MX is a total dog coasting on the GF4 aura) and their attempt at an AIW-type card is an under-powered, buggy flop right now. However, it's not being an Nvidiot to clearly discuss the failings of others.

Only ATI can move against Nvidia now, but they're gonna have to start delivering on their paper tigers. How many reviews for the R8500 have included the phrase, "...the benchmarks were surprising, considering it's specs..." At least, they'll keep the price pressure on Nvidia, so prices will be pressured down and we all win then.

 

[oldfart]

FWIW, I've seen the 2D problems. They are (were) very real. I had a Herc GF2 Pro that was an absolute blurry mess. It was so bad I could not own it. Back it went. I have a neighbor with a Dell with an OEM GF2 that is almost as bad. Anand recently had an article on the nV 2D issue. I currently own a Visiontek GF3, and its pretty good. Not the best I've seen, but decent enough. I've owned 3D cards based on Rendition, 3DFX, ATi and nVidia. Also serveral other 2D only cards. I liked the 3DFX cards I had. I still have a Voodoo 3 in one of the kids PC's. I'll always remember the WOW factor of my SLI setup.

R.I.P. 3DFX!
I

 

[DefRef]

A co-worker complained that her GeForce DDR was blurry, but I didn't see this myself and it was a refurbed card, so I can't say it was just the card. I guess I'm the luckiest SOB around to go 5 for 5 in the 2D sweepstakes.

 

[Compellor]

<< Would things have turned out differently if they'd come out with competitive products, ON SCHEDULE? Maybe, but you can't play "what if" because it doesn't matter. Execution matters and 3dfx didn't execute. End of story. Anything else is just excuses and Nivida hating. >>



Well, just remember... The same thing could happen to NVIDIA tomorrow, next week, next year, etc. They're not immune from the same things that happened to 3Dfx. A major screwup could send them to the very same grave where 3Dfx lies dead. R.I.P. 3Dfx.

 

[jiffylube1024]

<< A co-worker complained that her GeForce DDR was blurry, but I didn't see this myself and it was a refurbed card, so I can't say it was just the card. I guess I'm the luckiest SOB around to go 5 for 5 in the 2D sweepstakes >>



Or perhaps you've owned only nVidia products and you don't know what real 2d quality means. That co-worker was probably on to something.

I currently own an MSI GF3 Ti200, and it has by far, the worst 2d quality of any card I've owned (besides that V3 2k with the factory defect that I returned, striped lines all over the screen). I'm not saying that the quality is horrible, its not even bad. It's just that other cards I've used in the past: V3 2k, Radeon DDR, Rage 128, etc had better 2d quality.

 

[jiffylube1024]

saucycg -

<< Funny.

My Voodoo 3 worked beautifully and NEVER EVER crashed my system like my "state-of-the-art" GeForce 3 Ti200 card. After about 300+ "infinite loop" blue screens, I'm about ready to pull that st00pid a$$ nVidia card out, throw it in the microwave, and watch the sparkly lights. I sure wish the a$$wipes at nVidia would spend less time devloping "amazing new technologies" and get the current stuff right.

Oh how I long for the days of my rock solid, stable voodoo3 card/drivers.....mmmmm.... >>



I'll trade you a pack of 12 hotdogs for your GF3. The sizzling sound they will make in the microwave (not to mention the loud 'pop' if you keep them in there long enough) should be equally satisfying, and I'll get something I can use in return!

 

[Rand]

<<
I wasn't referring to anyone in particular in this thread with my mentions of what fanboys have said in the past, so I find it interesting and amusing that everyone seems to be taking these anecdotes so personally. >>



Your tone throughout the thread has been rather critical of those that promoted a positive reflection upon 3dfx, so I find it unsurprising that many took your words on a personal basis.
Indeed in my last post I specifically replied to your post directly rather then writing the post towards the thread participants as a whole.
When a dozen people seem to take it personally, it's generally a pretty safe bet that your posts came off on such a level whether intended or not.



<< I guess I'm the luckiest SOB around to go 5 for 5 in the 2D sweepstakes. >>



Not necessarily lucky at all, I've come across many that cannot seem to tell the difference between even an average nVidia board compared to a Matrox card even when run at higher resolutions in terms of 2D visual quality.... while others seem to notice the difference almost immediately.
Some people just seem more naturally attuned to slight variations in 2D output, it isnt even always the ones with the best eyesight that notice it.
Personally, the biggest sign of sub-par 2D for me isnt necessarily what I can visually see as what I can 'feel'. I've noticed that even when I can't visually notice anything more then a slight difference in quality I will often 'feel' the difference. By this I mean that if I work on a system for a few hours at a time I will often get a terrible migraine headache and everything will start appearing grainy to my eyes after a few hours. Yet on the other card with 2D that is only incrementally superior to my eyes I can easily work for 8+ hours without feeling any noticeable side-effects.

This is the primary factor why I do not run a 19" or better monitor at 1600x1200 at home, simply because there are no reasonably performing cards that I can work on for a few hours at such a resolution without feeling physical after-affects.
Sadly, Matrox, Appian, and one or two 3dfx cards have been the only graphics cards I've yet felt truely satisfied with at such a resolution.
With my present Gainward GF2, I cannot run any higher then 1152x864 for prolonged periods of time or 1280x960 for relatively short periods of time without it becoming bothersome.... and Gainward is typically considered to have among the best 2D visual quality of nVidia board manufacturers and my own experiences tend to agree with that.

 

[Egrimm]

R.I.P 3dfx.

 

[Sunner]

And so a legacy comes to an end

I liked 3dfx better when they were 3Dfx, their old name, logo, and hardware was better, I still have my old V2 around.

 

[richleader]

I never had a V2. I dropped $250 on a V1 a week before they came out.

 

[RobsTV]

Just as some nVidia owners have trouble with drivers, some 3dfx owners also have trouble.
To say the drivers were fine is just plain bull, or ignorant.
Towards the end, while they were still cranking along, 1000's of 3dfx owners like myself were
flooding the forums and newsgroups trying to find solutions to our V3 problems. Many here may
remember me from those quests for answers. It was funny, because even then all here were
saying no one has problems but me. Then I would post links to 3dfx own website, which clearly
showed the 1000's that couldn't get the card to properly work. Still, many ignorant people would
not believe that what I and many others were saying could possible be true. I finally sold the V3
and replaced it with a GF2 MX. Still have two V2 cards going strong in old system. Now that V2
was a great card. Even the V5 was a good card, but that still could not run 32bit glide, and was
drastically overpriced.

I have tried many video cards since the days when they said VGA would be a fad, and EGA was
all we needed. Besides the V2, the only other products that were problem free were nVidia.
(NV1 Diamond Edge 3D and STB Riva 128 excluded. Canopus Riva 128 was great).
Now, after trying all models of nVidia since NV1, they still are much better and have more compatable
drivers than 3dfx, and require little or no patches to get working with games, unlike 3dfx which had
patch as a middle name. Even Alf, (3dfx/STB tech support), stated that with 3dfx cards, you must
change drivers when you want to run different apps. No "One Driver Runs All" will work. That was
from Alf, the 3dfx tech that frequented 3dfx newsgroups and 3dfx dedicated forums.

The purchase of STB by 3dfx was clearly the beginning of the end.
They should have stayed with being a chip maker, and not a board maker.

 

[richleader]

<< Besides the V2, the only other products that were problem free were nvidia. >>



You didn't have a Tseng ET4000?

 

[spanky]

doesn't nvidia drivers have patches too?

 

[Parrotheader]

I'd always heard about the Nvidia 2D issues in forums like this and figured it was just bunk since most of you guys are MUCH more demanding than I am. I figured these are the same people who gripe if their game won't run at at least 100fps, while I'm usually quite satisfied with anything around 50fps (I realize the occasional slowdown will get me, but I can live through it if this card cost me 1/2-1/3 of what the top of the line is.) So I figured it was just inflated due to the scrutiny you guys place on video cards. After all, I'd used Nvidia cards before and never had any complaints about the 2D even though I had used ATI, Matrox, 3dfx, etc.

But then at work I FINALLY convinced my boss to let me ditch my 21" monitor and go to dual 17"s instead. Our primary card is a TNT2 Pro while our secondary card is on old ATI Xpert98. When the system is booting up the initial desktop is identical on both screens and it was only then when I had a side-by-side comparison that I finally saw what everyone was talking about. The color on the ATI was/is MUCH more vibrant than the Nvidia which seemed dull and flat by comparison. Likewise, the text on the ATI is MUCH crisper. I tweaked the settings and color tones of the TNT2 some and it helped, but it's still nowhere near the default setting of the old ATI. In fact, one of our graphics guys couldn't stand it and brought in his own Radeon VE just so he could have better 2D and dual monitor support. I realize the TNT2 is about 3 years old now, but then again the ATI is 4+ years old too. Fortunately, the lower the resolution you go the less of an issue it is. I usually run 1152x864 on both screens, but it's still very noticeable. I can live with it though. We'll be upgrading our cards later this year for "3D rendering purposes" (that's expense account talk for games ) so we'll most likely be switching over to something like ATI 8500s. I'm sure the GeForce-line cards have better 2D than TNT2s, but we'll go with the known factor in ATI in our case.

As far as the 3dfx.com finally closing up shop, is voodoofiles.com now going to be THE place to get drivers? I still use an old V3 2000 in my third system at home. The drivers are nice and stable now so I probably won't mess with a good thing. But if I ever pass the card along to a needy friend/relative (as I usually do when I upgrade) I'll need to have drivers for them.

Just FYI, anybody interested in purchasing the 3dfx.com domain name, it doesn't come up for renewal until May 2, 2003. Somehow I doubt they'll let it lapse though since they now own most of 3dfx's intellectual property.

 

[austin316]

Hey DefRef, when you mentioned that you doubled your numbers for half the cost, you hit pc costs right on the head. Supposedly after two years, you can buy a pc for half of the one you can buy now and it will be twice as fast. Hmm, 4 GHZ Processors for $100 in 2004??

 

[DefRef]

Typical Nvidia Hater Argument #43,742: "You just don't know what good 2D looks like."

Yawn...just can't let it go, can we? I agree that it's not what we see, but what we feel when working with our monitors, but for you to sit there and imply that anyone who doesn't agree that Nvidia 2D is inferior is stupid is assinine and presumptuous.

jiffylube: I've had TWO ATI cards once (Rage II & Rage Pro), but the latter couldn't hit 1600x1200x32@75 Hz, as I required, cuz it was only 4MB. The 16MB TNT allowed me to do that.

I'm currently sitting at work with a 21" Nokia 445xi, driven by whatever Intel 815 junk is in the Dell GX150 and it's blurry and nearly headache inducing at 1280x1024x32. Before (we got new boxes last Fall), I had a 4MB ATI card driving either a 17" Dell or a 21" Trinitron Dell and those weren't much to write home about. Mileage varies, but I've only been comfortable at home. I LOVE my Hitachi 751. It cost me $850 in July 1998, but it's the best 64 cents (and dropping) a day I've ever spent!

The whole issue of "vibrance" concerns me too. I think it's the visual equivalent of having the Loudness button on all the time on a stereo and isn't conducive to ACCURATE images. I've played around with the Digital Vibance setting and the color profiles in PowerDVD and they look artificial, oversaturated and lame. I'm comparing what I see on the screen to REAL LIFE and the real world doesn't have 'blooming' reds, etc. When I do graphic work, I need accurate colors, not juvenille hyped-up nonsense.

This is the same reason why I'm torn between the Klipsch 4.1s and the Logitech Z560s. The Logitechs cost half as much, BUT as a musician, I can't have inaccurate frequency response when editing and mixing sound. Most reviews and posts say, "Z560s are da shiznatch! I can make the pictures fall off the walls, it has so much BASS!!!" That's all good, but if the reproduction of sound is colored to appeal to 16-year-old Limp Bizkit fans, I'm gonna have to take back some more bottles to get the Kliptchs. "OK" is not good enough for me.

 

[Corn]

<< You just don't know what good 2D looks like. >>



Heh, well since you can't tell a difference with vsync on and off, you're eyesight is highly suspect Def.



[edit] ....oh and get the Klipsch 5.1's, don't shortchange yourself, wait a little longer and save up.