A Voodoo 1 would go great with that CPU for stuff like Quake.

Agree that a V1 is appropriate for this rig.

However Blood specifically doesn't benefit performance wise from Voodoo, and many say it actually hurts visual quality.
If you want to achieve max performance in 2D VESA modes consider a Voodoo3 PCI or Banshee as they have a fast VESA core.
Otherwise the only thing that would help Blood and other Build engine games is a faster CPU, 233MMX for example or a K6-3 if your board supports it.

Also, check your board can cache 128MB. If it's limited to 64MB cachable area (e.g. Intel VX/TX) then you're taking a hit there too.

Thirding the Voodoo 1 for GLide games.

For non-GLide stuff, you'll need a faster CPU. I don't think the S3 is holding you back in that regard.

I also think that the video card is not the bottleneck in software-rendered games. A Cyrix or AMD CPU with write combining might do slightly better with a different video card, but for a PMMX the 868 should be fine.
I don't have experience with Blood, but it's possible that s3vbe20 + s3spdup will help performance.

Blood runs horribly on any CPU below a P2-300 for me... Even then, it slows down. Benefits from large amounts of RAM too.

Voodoo 1 or PCI RAGE cards are really about as far as it is worth going on that CPU I think... Maybe a PCI TNT if you wanted to push it, but that's really Pentium 2 AGP era stuff.

slimbag wrote:

.. games such as blood ...

Software renderer or Glide?

Putas wrote:

Software renderer or Glide?

software renderer

oerk wrote:

For non-GLide stuff, you'll need a faster CPU. I don't think the S3 is holding you back in that regard.

That S3 868 is OK for 486, but for Pentium I woulnd't be so sure. I'd use some Matrox or Tseng ET6000... V3 or TNT would also be way better.

I tested Vision 868 PCI some time ago and was quite surprised that is was actually quite slow.

Below are some numbers from a similar system after changing the CPU and the VGA as an indication of what to expect in Quake. I used Phil's benchmark suite for this, you can also check there for more results and draw your onw conclusions. You could try running the benchmark too and see if there's something wrong currently and have some numbers to measure improvement after upgrading.
Phil's Ultimate VGA Benchmark Database Project

My summary, assuming you decide to improve this system: Don't expect miracles. For what you are targeting, DOS software rendered games, first of all get the fastest CPU your board can handle. This will have the greatest impact and then a faster VGA will help, but not that much unless the existing card is really slow. Anyway, I got my 233 MMX recently for ~5 euros from ebay without researching too much and the G450 (not the fastest, but still a really good DOS performer) for ~15 so it shouldn't cost you much to change both.

system / doom fps / quake fps
MMX 166MHz, 64MB RAM, S3 Trio 64V+ 1MB / 71,5 / 36,2
MMX 233MHz, 64MB RAM, S3 Trio 64V+ 1MB / 80,2 / 42,9
MMX 233MHz, 64MB RAM, Matrox G450 32MB / 83,3 / 44,8

It depends on what you really want but a TNT2 PCI isn't a bad choice and it is cheap, my main P1 box is running a Voodoo Rush.

My first thought was a banshee as well

If you're trying to stay era correct, I'd say a Riva TNT max or an ATI Rage Pro + a Voodoo 1.

QBiN wrote:

If you're trying to stay era correct, I'd say a Riva TNT max or an ATI Rage Pro + a Voodoo 1.

How is TNT era correct? The first card was released in June, 1998. The first Pentium II-450 was released a month later, Pentium MMX was already outdated by then.

I suppose one could argue the case that a lot of people kept hold of their Pentium MMX system well into the early 2000's and usually just added a few upgrades over the years.

In 1999 I was still using a 386SLC.

A Riva128 would be a good choice for this system.

My testing on a slow P-133:

Trio 64V+ 2MB:
3DBench: 124.5
PCPlayer: 36.9
Doom: 1157
Quake: 31.1
Speedsys VESA: 18370kb/s

Vision 968 4MB:
3DBench: 116.3
PCPlayer: 34.9
Doom: 1168
Quake: 29.7
Speedsys VESA: 10473kb/s

Tseng ET6000 2MB:
3DBench: 130.3
PCPlayer: 37.2
Doom: 1084
Quake: 31.3
Speedsys VESA: 53092kb/s

I'll try with a P-MMX 200/233 later today.

RacoonRider wrote:

QBiN wrote:

If you're trying to stay era correct, I'd say a Riva TNT max or an ATI Rage Pro + a Voodoo 1.

How is TNT era correct? The first card was released in June, 1998. The first Pentium II-450 was released a month later, Pentium MMX was already outdated by then.

The P55C was released in 1997. The original TNT (not TNT2) launched in March of 1998. Sure, the Riva 128 maybe a better year for year match, but it was such a disappointment ("128 reasons not to buy nvidia"), I personally know folks who skipped straight to the TNT.

In 98 I had a dual 200mmx rig with an ATI Xpert@Play PCI... Though I wish I had a TNT at the time.

QBiN wrote:

The P55C was released in 1997. The original TNT (not TNT2) launched in March of 1998. Sure, the Riva 128 maybe a better year for year match, but it was such a disappointment ("128 reasons not to buy nvidia"), I personally know folks who skipped straight to the TNT.

In 98 I had a dual 200mmx rig with an ATI Xpert@Play PCI... Though I wish I had a TNT at the time.

TNT only paper launched in March with wrong specs. I would like to see those 128 reasons, Riva beats Rage Pro in both DOS and 3D gaming.

filipetolhuizen wrote:

A Riva128 would be a good choice for this system.

yes. that's what I use in my 200mmx built as well, VBE3.0 BIOS, very fast 2d vga core and compatible!