What speed could most people get their Voodoo3 2000 to?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

GopherMobile

Member
Apr 19, 2000
134
0
0
Yeah yeah but still!(about the Geforce memory :)).

It was eight chips. And where I got the chip from...wasn't actually $40, but 70 with shipping - $30 3dfx rebate. Hmm...actually I don't remember which place I ordered it from...the warranty's from 3dfx and everything, so I didn't pay all that much attention, and I deleted the comfirmation e-mail I got. I just went to pricewatch.com and did a search for the card. Went with the lowest price/shipping rate. There were a fair amount of them priced at $60 though so it shouldn't be hard to find. Hrmm I'll find my receipt eventually and then figure out where it came from =).
 

tweakr

Senior member
Mar 2, 2000
270
0
0
GopherMobile

I checked the RAM on my V3 that reaches 190 - it reads exactly the same as yours. For anyone who's interested, the chips on my SGRam V3 read:

Siemens
SGRAM
HY835916320TQ -6
Germany A
9929 V22508

I would guess that you are correct about the -7 meaning that the board has 7ns memory - since 1/7x10^-9 = 143 mhz (the rated speed of the chip on a V3 2000). I would also guess that the -6 in my numbers above suggest that the rated speed for the SGRAM in my other machine is 1/6x10^-9 = 166mhz.

It should be noted that the SGRAM COULD be overclocked past 166, but only to 172 before it started giving me artifacts in UT. I had to drop the speed since transferring it to a case with less airflow.

As for the GeForce memory, this is DDR-SGRam, which COULD (note could - I'm not entirely sure about this) be the limiting factor, since from most people's experience SGRam doesn't TEND to clock up as well as SDRam. Also, the stress of handling DDR transfers at high clock speeds could well limit the overclocking abilities of the memory.

I would GUESS that the 7ns RAM on our V3-2000s is very well made SDRam, hence it's ability to reach ~190mhz or higher.

cheers
tweakr
 

ssjgokou1

Banned
Jul 2, 2000
190
0
0
wait, what do you mean

SIEMENS, that I have on one of my sdram cards, says nothing about "HY" in the serial #'s. It's actually German ram.

You said "I checked the ram of my v3 3k w/SGRam" I think you meant SDRam because it overclocked to 190mhz. Also, I don't think they will lable sdram and sgram with the same things on it.

I have only heard either Siemens, or HY, but never both at the same time.

How is it that you calculated that 7ns ram thing (multiplied it by 10, and divided by 1/7th or something)

I found out about my Samsung ram, I originally said that I have a generic ram and three samsung rams, but I found out that the "Generic" ram is actually a form of Samsung because it read "SEC KOREA" I found out that "SEC" is a manufacturing company or division of Samsung :).

 

tweakr

Senior member
Mar 2, 2000
270
0
0
ssjgokou1

The Siemens RAM was from my SGRAM card..take your time and read my post carefully would you please?

I did not say "I checked the ram of my v3 3k w/SGRAM", I said "I checked the ram of my v3 w/SGRam. It's the card that only made it to 166 - it's a V3 2000, not a 3000.

The RAM on the card which made it to 190mhz was the same as Gophermobiles - SDRAM with the same markings as his.

And I'm not lying about the RAM markings - I just copied down exactly what was written on each chip from my SGRam Voodoo3 2000. "HY" does not necessarily mean Hyundai..it may merely be coincidence.

tweakr
 

ssjgokou1

Banned
Jul 2, 2000
190
0
0
HY does! mean hyundai, and you said that the ram has 166mhz limit, since they use the same ram on the v3 2k as 3k, then I don't see why you are having problems with oc'ing your v3 2k past 166mhz.

Second, maybe you should get your message across more clearly :(
 

ssjgokou1

Banned
Jul 2, 2000
190
0
0
HY does! mean hyundai, and you said that the ram has 166mhz limit, since they use the same ram on the v3 2k as 3k, then I don't see why you are having problems with oc'ing your v3 2k past 166mhz.

Second, maybe you should get your message across more clearly :(
 

tweakr

Senior member
Mar 2, 2000
270
0
0
ssjgokou1

Right, here we go, once more from the top...

I own two Voodoo3 2000s - the older one of which is equipped with SGRam with the markings:

Siemens
SGRAM
HY835916320TQ -6
Germany A
9929 V22508

and the second (newer) one has SDRam with the markings:

0008 3-1
MT 48LCIM16A1
TG -7 S E

Now, the first one (with SGRam) makes it to 166mhz stable. The second one (with SDRam) makes it to 190mhz stable. I SURMISE that the Ram is the limiting factor in both cases, since any setting above the two mentioned results in "snow" - hence my suspicion that the Ram is limiting the overclocking of the card. The Voodoo3 chipset itself is well cooled on both cards...

I calculated the mhz rating of the RAM using a very simple formula. If you do the equation 1/speed rating of chip, then it gives you the hertz rating of the chip. For example, 1/7ns = 1/7E-9 = 142857142.85714... = 143mhz. A similar calculation for 6ns chips - 1/6ns = 1/6E-9 = 166666666.66666 = 166mhz.

I can get you a scan of the RAM if you still will not believe me..but that's what's on the cards..and those are my results...

sorry to have offended you in any way
tweakr



 

Goi

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
6,754
4
91
OK, I'm also using a Voodoo3, except mines a V3 3000 rather than 2000.
My V3 3000 only overclocks to 180+. I used to have a C300A overclocked to 504MHz, and using every tweak I could do, I managed to get it to around 64-65FPS in demo001 on 640x480, lowest game settings except
1) high quality sound
2) no simple items
3) 2/3 texture slider
I think those are the only non-lowest settings, but I could be missing some.

Currently I have a C533@600MHz and it doesn't even hit 60FPS in demo001. Everything else in my system is the same.

The CPU is definitely the bottleneck here, but I would have though your Cumine would perform better than my Celeron.

As for memory heatsinks, for the most part they do nothing except look clunkly(or cool, depending on your taste). SDRAM is basically made out of capacitors in their memory cells rather than transistors, and do not benefit much, if any, from cooling.
 

ssjgokou1

Banned
Jul 2, 2000
190
0
0
your cpu isn't the bottleneck, it's just the resolution. Tone it up a notch to 1074x768, and then try the two speeds, you will like the difference.

It could be the v3 also, they usually get maxxed out at 600mhz.
 

Goi

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
6,754
4
91
Erm, at low resolutions, the CPU *IS* the bottleneck, since triangle output remains the same independent of resolution, but pixel output varies. At low resolutions, pixel output is the least, so the video card's fillrate isn't stressed that much.

Besides, if I can't get 60FPS at 640x480, I sure as hell won't be getting 60FPS at a higher resolution at the same graphical settings. On my old C300A@504MHz I've run HQ 1024x768 benches before, and the results are in the 40s. That's unacceptable for me, but that's just me.

The V3 is definitely capable of higher framerates. I've seem reviews on the web when a V3 is paired up with a P3E or Athlon of higher speeds(600MHz or more) and they do at least 80FPS, if not in the 90s or higher.
 

ssjgokou1

Banned
Jul 2, 2000
190
0
0
you said it yourself, if the cpu is the bottleneck, then you won't see a frame rate DROP if you switch resolutions (higher ones) since your card isn't stressed,
 

Goi

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
6,754
4
91
Erm, the card isn't stressed at 640x480. When I switch to a higher resolution, the framerate drops. This is the result of the video card being more stressed than it was at 640x480. At 640x480, to maintain a 60FPS framerate, assuming no other bottlenecks and no overdraw, you need 640*480*60FPS = 18432000Pixels/s, or around 18.4MPixels/s.
At 1024x768, to maintain a 60FPS framerate, you need 1024*768*60FPS = 47185920Pixels/s, or around 47Mpixels/s.

Now, assume I have a card that has a 30Mpixels/s fillrate, and a slow CPU. At 640x480, the card should be able to achieve a framerate of 97.6FPS, but if I only get 60, and assuming I have enough memory bandwidth, its because my CPU isn't able to process all the triangle data. However, when I switch to 1024x768, my framerate will drop below 60FPS. This drop isn't because of my CPU now, since its still processing the same amount of triangles. Its because my 30Mpixels/s card isn't able to sustain 60FPS, but instead only 38FPS.

That's why I'm saying that at low resolutions, the CPU is the bottleneck if you have a fast enough card. The Voodoo3 is a fast enough card, at least for my Celeron 533@600MHz. That's also the reason why you will see benchmarks of the Voodoo3 paired with other CPUs that will outperform my setup at 640x480 rather handily.
 

Orbius

Golden Member
Oct 13, 1999
1,037
0
0
My V3 2000 has the SEC markings, so this means Samsung ram from what I've been reading. It used to run at 175 with a small fan on it perfectly, but it would not work at all if I went 1mhz faster. I ran it at stock speed for several months. And now when I try to overclock it, 172 seems to be about the limit. Guess its getting old :).
 

ssjgohan1

Banned
Jul 21, 2000
22
0
0
ok Goi, so theroetically the v3 3k could do 166Mpixels/s, so that's a lot more than 97fps if you said that a card has 40Mpixels/s, but they why does a v3 get maxxed out when it's paired with a 800mhz cpu? It should do fine right, but for some reason, it runs out of fill rate, maybe you forgot something in your calculations.

I don't really know to much about this triangle thing. I guess that's why the GeForce can do Hardware T&L, so then a 400mhz cpu and a 600mhz cpu shouldn't make a noticable difference, since the hardest part for the processor is done by the video cards now :)

by the way, SEC is part of samsung, except I have some that say Samsung, and one that says SEC.
 

Soccerman

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
6,378
0
0
heh I have a Voodoo 3 2K AGP with 5.5 nanosecond SDRAM, I had it up at 183 without a problem, I had a crappy old CPU (talking Socket 7 here) fan on it.

my case, and CPU however are under alot of heat stress right now, becuase my house is sooo damned hot, and I probably need to install a blowhole, and upgrade the two fans I have blowing in (they only run at 2-3K RPM! WTF is that! next time I'm looking for one with more amperage draw...

in any case, I'm running dangerously hot right now, so I've reduced the clock down to default for now. next chance I get, when the house is cool, I'm going to overclock like I've never overclocked it before. going to try 190, and go up in increments.

rosencrantz

It sounds to me like you were pretty lucky to find a board that has SGRAM, let alone SGRAM that is capable of 181mhz (5.5ns is 181mhz)!

overclock to 181 is almost guaranteed, providing those are the correct ns ratings on your RAM and you're core isn't bad.

For the most part, the Voodoo 3 has been limited by it's RAM speed, rather then the core speed. I figured this out quite a while ago, when people started getting V3 2K boards with 5.5 nanosecond RAM on it and not having problems hitting the limits of their RAM. let alone that there was a special edition V3 I think from Alienware (don't remember) which was default of 200mhz (providing you with 200MPixels, and 400MTexels, pretty close to the Geforce).

EDIT: fixed bold...
 

Goi

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
6,754
4
91
ssjgohan1, as I mentioned in my post, I left out a lot of constants in the equation to simplify things. Stuff like pixel overdraw can decrease the actual framerate to a third or less than the theoretical framerate. However, these constants do not affect my arguments, since they ARE constants and remain constant regardless of resolution changes. I'm just giving an example with concrete(although unrealistic) numbers to help you understand why a decent videocard is not fillrate limited or bandwidth limited, but is rather CPU limited.