Is a Voodoo3 3000 better than a TNT2 M64?

[oldfart]

Hmm. Sounds like the old drivers may be conflicting. Did you uninstall the old drivers first? Do an uninstall, then boot up into safe mode. Go to device manager, display adapters, and remove anything that is there. BTW, since you have that Radeon....KEEP IT!!

 

[PlunX]

Just tried that.. Same thing's happening. Any other suggestions?

 

[Dark4ng3l]

do a clean install(format and reinstall everything) then install the via 4 in 1 drivers and load video drivers.

 

[PlunX]

I've been wanting to do that, but for some strange reason I can't get my floppy drive working and there isn't any way to use FDISK without having the floppy drive.. Right?

 

[Dark4ng3l]

you could restart in dos and boot from the wondows cd rom? not sure if you bios supports that tho

 

[Dark4ng3l]

I meant restart in dos , format, boot from cd

 

[Orbius]

BFG, you've obviously never heard of the LOD(level of detail) adjustment for the V3 3000. The quality of the display on the V3 was never blurry as you claim, but now with all the detail options, its gives the textures an extrmely sharp look.

 

[BFG10K]

BFG, you've obviously never heard of the LOD(level of detail) adjustment for the V3 3000.

I have used it. Unfortunately it doesn't help a 256 x 256 texture board run 512 x 512 textures. Also the LOD bias doesn't fix the banding.

32 bit colour is far better than 16/22/24 or whatever the heck 3dfx calls it. The colours on a GeForce are deep, rich and really smooth.

The quality of the display on the V3 was never blurry as you claim, but now with all the detail options, its gives the textures an extrmely sharp look.

If it wasn't blurry before how can LOD bias improve it?

I know what LOD bias does and I have tried it. It doesn't really help at all but it gives me a performance hit of several fps. Given I only have 55 fps to play with (pretty jerky at times) I don't want to sacrifice any speed.

Face it, the V3 sucks in terms of 3D image quality. Its only redeeming feature is that it's cheap and it runs much faster than an M64. It doesn't somehow make me a 3dfx basher just because I don't pretend that the V3 is good.

 

[Dark4ng3l]

55 fps jerky???? I play with 35 fps all day long(1024x768 res) and it's smooth.

 

[BFG10K]

55 fps jerky????

Yes, especially in texture heavy levels like DM9. 65 fps is better but still a bit jerky at times as well.

I play with 35 fps all day long(1024x768 res) and it's smooth.

Of course it is.

 

[Petro89]

First of all, the question was "is a v3 3000 better than a tnt2 m64", not "is a v3 3000 better than a GF2, Radeon or V5".
The V3 is far better than an m64, especially in games.
The v3 is very trouble-free, and will work with any configuration.
3dfx regularly releases drivers.
2d quality is awesome, especially at high res.
I get 65-70 fps in Q3 at 800x600 SHQ, and 45-50 at 1024x768, perfectly playable.
Glide is great in EA games like Live 2000, it looks MUCH better than D3D.
The V3 can be had for about $100 new, or $60 or so used, a great price.
I have yet to find a game that is not playable at 1024x768, and 800x600 absolutely flies.
True, it isn't the best-looking, but it's good enough, and the speed makes up for it.

On a side note, I used to own a GF DDR, and it was great for about 2-3 minutes, when is when it usually froze. BIOS upgrades, mobo drivers, AGP 1x, etc did nothing to fix the problem. I put in a V3 and haven't had a crash/freeze in 3 months.

By the way, anyone that buys games to look at the sky is pretty queer.