Logs on the fire: V5 or Radeon decision.

[Nesta]

I know the topic is greatly contested, however, I'm seeking for some concrete info.

This is an OS specific question regarding the cards: Which card runs smooth under Win2K/DX8? 2D is important, but 3D quality is a must.

I currently own a CL GeForce DDR and am searching for something else. Radeon DDR or V5? Also, which driver set is more robust? I don't want to jump through 40 hoops (like I have with VIA and Nvidia) to run this config.

I'm playing Rune, UT, and BG2; mostly in 1024*768*32 mode. FPS is important, but so is my eyesight Haven't had much experience with FSAA, but I imagine that the novelty wears off, maybe? How about FSAA and games in the next 6 mos?

Please be specific with arguments either way (like backing up your opinion with a link to some results if possible) instead of flaming another card or owner. Also, please don't bitch about Win2K being a 'business' OS. I work at home, so Win98 is completely unacceptable. 2000 has been out long enough for card companies to get their ass in gear.

Oh yeah, the box:
AMD 1 gig/MSI KT133 mobo.
256 MB Mushkin high performance.
300W Power supply.

Thanks.

 

[Finality]

Anand just did a piece about this.

Windows 2000 performance Note while the Radeon 2000 drivers are slower the card itself is still faster in Q3 than the Voodoo5.

Most AT people here use Win2000 these days including myself.

 

[Nesta]

Finality-

I read yesterday and noticed that he compared the 'budget' line. V4500 vs. Radeon SDR, etc. A good read, but a little biased towards nVidia.

It looks like the ATi, Win2K drivers are still lacking.

I still want some input from the 'field'.

 

[Aboroth]

Well, I don't think whoever did that review turned on a couple settings in the drivers that help performance a LOT while not degrading image quality.
I think they are to enable refresh optimization and set depth precision to fastest. Ask DaveB3D for further details.

 

[snow patrol]

Upgrading from a Geforce DDR to a Voodoo 5 5500 won't give you much in the way of performance gain...

 

[Nesta]

snow patrol-

I understand that, I'm looking for quality not quantity. If that were the case I'd get a GTS.

 

[JACKHAMMER]

3dfx w2k drivers are definetly more robust than Radeon. No doubt about it.

 

[Finality]

No it doesn't make a difference. I thought about that earlier but the performance should be the same across the opertaing systems.

The clock speed has not changed just driver optimizations. If you notice 3dfx does not take a performance hit either which leads you to the conclusion that ATI is a slacker in there Win2000 driver department.

 

[RoboTECH]

3dfx's newer drivers for Win2k have shown great improvement

NT Compatible 3dfx FAQ

also 3dSpotlight

and Voodoo Source

are great websites for 5500 tweeking.

ATi apparently hasn't released very good drivers for win2k yet. Their 16-bit performance sucks as well as image quality lacking, whereas the 5500's 16-bit is near-32bit quality in the vast, vast majority of situations.

oh yeah, don't forget FSAA

 

[Hawk]

Does that mean their 32 bit sucks? =) Anyway, new Win2k "beta" drivers came out for the Radeon a couple of days ago, don't know much about them though.

 

[Nesta]

To all:

Thanks for the input and the links.

I ordered a V5 and hopefully will see it early next week. ATi loses another potential customer due to their lackluster driver support.

 

[RoboTECH]

Nesta, post up or email me or wingnut about the 5500

make sure you check out those websites, they're fantastic.

Lotsa great driver tweeks. 3dfx REALLY deserve MAJOR kudos for creating such an easily tweekable driver set.

Also recommend you check out Gary Peterson's Voodoo overclocker. It allows you to set clock speed and refresh rates for all resolutions, all from a single page. It integrates right into your Video System Properties tabs if you want.

good stuff.

 

[Nesta]

Robo

Thanks for the further input. Where is Gary Peterson's OC'er? This will be my first venture back to 3dfx (since the Voodoo2 days). I am looking forward to greater hardware compatibility/less frustration.

I will post a thread or mail you in a couple weeks after the V5 is humming, as I'm always interested in the increasing functionality.

 

[WetWilly]

I just killed my V3 2000 (I don't want to talk about it ). Popped in a spare vid card, an ATI Rage 128 with latest drivers, and boy it made me realized what a great yeowman's card the V3 was. This was really hammered home when I went into Unreal, where I'd been running the V3 at 1024x768 with Glide and A3D on. Smooth as ever, no glitches at all. With the ATI, OpenGL was a slide show; D3D at 1024x768 was choppy, 800x600 was usable. Definitely NOT as good as Glide.

So I just ordered a V5500. Radeon's not bad, but there have been lots of reports of shimmering text with Trinitron monitors (which I have). And like RoboTECH said, 3dfx really deserves credit for the tweakability of their drivers. It's too bad that no reviews focus on how good 3dfx's 16/22-bit stuff can look if you tweak it - in some instances you don't even miss 32-bit at all.

The other thing that people gripe about with 3dfx is their incomplete to non-existent AGP implementation. But they tend to leave out the fact that that "feature" means that 3dfx cards are much less likely to cause you grief on VIA systems.

 

[RoboTECH]

good points Wet Willy

1) "3dfx sucks, they have no AGP implementation"

FACT - GTS and Radeon cards have had FAR more problems with non-Intel motherboards

2) 3dfx doesn't release drivers often enough

FACT - nvidia's driver releases are buggy as hell (GeForceFAQ confirms this, as do the ungodly # of posts on just about every video hardware board on the planet). A

FACT - ATi is still working on changing their reputation of "poor driver support" and their win2k drivers are still pretty lame.

FACT - 3dfx released DX8 drivers almost a month ago. Not a peep from either of their competitiors.

FACT - you can do more tweeking and adjusting with 3dfx's driver than you can with either of their competitors drivers

3) 3dfx needs a spare power supply lead to power their card

FACT - Geforce1 cards had tons of problems that would've been solved ENTIRELY by using a direct PS lead

4) 3dfx is slower than the others

FACT - with each stable driver release, 3dfx gains speed and reduces the minor incompatibilites that have occured/were discovered along the way. The 5500, for a card that was supposed to compete with the GeForce 1 DDR boards, is holding its own, and is "fast enough" in EVERY game I've played.

Like I said elsewhere, now that the "benchmarking hype" has worn off, and 3dfx has had a chance to develop mature drivers, the speed differences between the "big 3" is almost neglible in most cases, and there are SOO many reasons (the now-cheap price being 1!!) to pick up a 5500 instead of the competition. People are grabbing them, learning how to tweek the drivers, and saying "those website reviewers are either drunk or they're paid off. This card kicks royal A$$!!!"

<deeeeeeeeeep breath>

Okay. I'm done now.

 

[Finality]

FACT that was funny

I still wouldn't take a V5 5500 over a Radeon or GTS. Sticking with the GTS for now because I only use windows 2000.

 

[WetWilly]

Robo,

Catch your breath - I'll tag off with you on the facts and add a couple more

2) 3dfx doesn't release drivers often enough
4) 3dfx is slower than the others
Three magic letters: HSR Let 3dfx polish it - and they will - and I suspect we'll see those Geforce2 Ultra owners and others who gloated about the transfer of the V6000 to Quantum3D get spanked at 1600x1200 by a lowly 166MHz non-AGP non-DDR V5500 that cost less than 1/2 the price of the Ultra. For that matter, do any Geforce2 Ultra owners want to take on a V5500 with beta HSR under Quake III 1024x768 and 4x FSAA right now?

3) 3dfx needs a spare power supply lead to power their card
WHAT IS THE DEAL WITH PEOPLE THAT COMPLAIN ABOUT THIS? Geez, like the power to the AGP slot (which has to course its way through the system board) is somehow coming from some mysterious and superior source other than the PC's power supply. Duh. I'd guess these are the same people that can't push a stylus through a chad.

Plus:

5) FACT - you need to add the cost of an optomotrist appointment and eyeglasses to the price of a Geforce, since that crappy 2D is going to cost you with early eyestrain.

 

[Nesta]

You guys are going nuts with this thread...I wish my V5 would arrive soon so I could dump the DDR now!!

How long til we see a certified version of these drivers? After that, let's get the tweak-master thread going.

I know what's the big deal about the power?

 

[WetWilly]

The bad part is I don't have my V5500 yet either. I'm just really missing my V3. And my Ritalin

 

[Krodge]

For one the 5500 is probably a good card for you because you don't want a GF2, use Win2K and play mainly glide games. (UT and Rune). Now if you want to take a risk the Raedon DDR is a faster card in Win98 and will be a faster card in Win2K if ATI can get their a$$ is gear and write better drivers. The Raedon also has superior 2D/3D quality than any of the big 3. Quality is an opinion so you may think a 5500 looks better, but I think the Raedon does.

The 5500 is not really powerful enough to be running FSAA if fps is important to you. It probably wont really be worth your money to upgrade at this time anyways. I would definitely wait for the next gen cards to come out, since any card you choose wont yield a large difference over your current one.

 

[nippyjun]

Nesta, you made the right choice. Wait till you see FSAA and use HSR!

 

[Nesta]

Any feedback on the HSR yet? I heard Q3 performance is increased through a reg tweak...here's a link [l]http://www.voodooextreme.com[/l]

 

[Looney]

RoboTECH,

Where can i get Gary Peterson's Voodoo overclocker?

 

[RoboTECH]

here ya go

Gary Peterson's Voodoo5 Refresh Rate/Overclocker

 

[Looney]

Thanks!