Any news on the voodoo 6?

[Bignate603]

I've heard rumors about their new card and was wondering if anyone had any solid info on it. I've heard it has 8 processors running in SLI but the T&L is on a seperate chip. It requires a seperate power supply and is rumored to be almost a foot long. Of course, that size may be whittled down because of space contraints in some cases. Anyways, I was wondering if anybody found any solid info or a site about it.

 

[Vegito]

Man, why don't these guys develop better chips instead of flooding a board with 10 chips.

 

[Goi]

The V5 6000 is already a foot long(full size card) and its jam packed with 4 VSA-100 chips. I don't think 8 chips will fit even on a full size card.
Besides, I haven't heard anything on the V6...do you mean the Rampage?

 

[Maniac9127]

I can't wait for the V5 6k. HW based 4 times FSAA, 128MB of ram (too bad it's not DDR), an external PSU with a huge trasformer, and it can acually RUN quake at MAX with 4x FSAA!!! Can't say that about any GeForces!

Wish I had the money to buy one tho .

 

[Goi]

Maniac it doesn't really need DDR since the memory is banked, in parallel configuration, which means its 4X the normal bandwidth since there's 4 chips.

As for playing quake at max with 4X FSAA, I don't think even the V5 6K will make that possible. It will likely be as fast as the GeForce Ultra ir not quite a bit faster, but even then, running quake3 at maxed out resolutions and settings will likely not be that playable...unless you're talking about the original quake

 

[Sunner]

I think the V5-6K will be fairly equal to the GTS Ultra, give or take some performance.
Of course, if that would hold true, and the prices are fairly equal, the Ultra would be the obvious choice.

 

[wake]

What makes you think the Ultra is the obvious choice?
3dfx obviously has superior image quality, framerate, and FSAA quality and speed.

 

[Sunner]

You didnt by any chance happen to actually read my post?


<< if that would hold true >>


IE, if the performance is about equal, then the GTS would be the obvious choice.

 

[merlocka]

Yeah, I don't see the 6000 being much faster than an ultra. If we use Q3 as a good fillrate benchmark and you look at the 1280x1024 and 1600x1200 numbers... well, and ultra is twice as fast as V5 5500. There is almost 10% overhead when using 2 VSA chips (judging from the V4 -> v5 numbers) so unless they have driver problems that they can fix I see the 6000 being no faster than an Ultra at hi res.

 

[Maniac9127]

No, acually at a tech demo at whever the heck it was, they acually had Q3 running, max settings, with hw FSAA, and it ran at something like 5fps, that's pretty amazing. Then they turned it down to reasonable levels (not sure what the definition of 'reasonable' was, but something around 1024x786), and it ran perfectly without any noticable drop downs.

I still wish I could afford one of thoes babies

 

[Pocatello]

It would be nice to have one...for free

 

[Sunner]

One thing to remember is not to trust sites that say stuff like &quot;I saw card X play game Y at res Z and it maintained good framerates, probabaly in the 40's constantly&quot; since those are just estimates.

When the TNT was the hottest topic of discussion before it was released, some site(cant remember which one) said it had seen a TNT play Motorhead at 1600x1200 with &quot;good&quot; framerates, and trust me, a TNT can NOT play MH @ 1600x1200 and keep good framerates, unless your definition of good is a bit strange.

 

[Maniac9127]

Well they didn't say 'good' frame rates, they said it ran like crap. Total and utter crap. But the fact that it ran PERIOD was amazing.

And besides, as long as you've got over 60 or so fps, it doesn't matter what the heck speed it runs at, there's no noticable difference.

60fps, 60,000,000fps, no difference what so ever.

 

[merlocka]

Well, as long as it never *drops* below 60