Trident Cyber9397DVD vs Rage LT Pro?

[fleabag]

How does the Trident Cyber9397DVD compare to the ATI Rage LT Pro? Both of these video cards have 4MB of video memory, and I'm just wondering how does the Cyber9397DVD stack up to the ATI Rage LT Pro. I know that over time through driver revisions the LT pro finally got Open GL and supports Directx 5. As for the Cyber9397, I know nothing about this card and was wondering if anybody had had experience with this card in running games and how its performance compared to ATi's card.

 

[Insomniator]

wat

 

[Binky]

These cards are, umm, really old. You should really give more info.

 

[Schmide]

Both these cards are nothing more than video ram and digital to analog converters. The difference will only be in the drivers you can find for them if any.

 

[Andrew1990]

Well, FYI, I was actually able to run COunter-Strike Source on a Rage 128 Ultra. Now it ran horribly, but it ran.

The Trident card is much worse though. It will barely run CS1.6.

 

[thilanliyan]

Is this a parody of one of the countless 4870 vs 260 threads? 😕

 

[fleabag]

Originally posted by: Schmide
Both these cards are nothing more than video ram and digital to analog converters. The difference will only be in the drivers you can find for them if any.

Not true, even the Mach 8 was more than that as it did not require the CPU in order to process graphics, and the Mach 32 being the first GUI accelerator, a stark contrast to what you just accused the Cyber9397DVD and the LT Pro as being, both far more advanced than the Mach 8 or Mach 32 which did not posess 3D hardware acceleration (to my knowledge, for all I know only the LT pro has 3D hardware acceleration).. Play nice why don't you?

 

[WT]

Battle of the titans !!! Tseng Labs FTW !!!



Ehhh, I kid .. S3 Virge takes the top honors here 😀

 

[Zap]

Originally posted by: WT
Battle of the titans !!! Tseng Labs FTW !!!

Hey, I'm still using a Tseng Labs ET6000 to this day, in my server. Those were awesome 2D cards BITD.

 

[nenforcer]

Neither, you want a Number Nine Revolution IV "Ticket to Ride".

Trust me.

 

[kmmatney]

I just threw out my old Diamond Viper II a few days ago.

I would say the Rage LT Pro would be better, just because Trident has never been known for gaming, and the Rage line was somewhat gamer oriented. Probably easier to get drivers for the Rage card as well.

 

[Schmide]

Originally posted by: fleabag

Originally posted by: Schmide
Both these cards are nothing more than video ram and digital to analog converters. The difference will only be in the drivers you can find for them if any.

Not true, even the Mach 8 was more than that as it did not require the CPU in order to process graphics, and the Mach 32 being the first GUI accelerator, a stark contrast to what you just accused the Cyber9397DVD and the LT Pro as being, both far more advanced than the Mach 8 or Mach 32 which did not posess 3D hardware acceleration (to my knowledge, for all I know only the LT pro has 3D hardware acceleration).. Play nice why don't you?

You're right. I would say; however, relative to games, no games took advantage of the blt and sprite hardware during that time. The hardware was just to diverse, and the cost of developing for it was costly and buggy. Most just used VESA bios to map video memory high and write directly to memory during the VBI. DPMI FTW. I think the Mach series was even limited VBE. If a game did use such acceleration, it was to back buffer the image to avoid flicker. However, I think backbuffering wasn't offered untill VBE 3.0 which was a 1998 release.