386SX wrote:

I couldn't say it was or was not superior technically. Probably there's space for discussing both possibilities. If you try for […]
Show full quote

Jorpho wrote:

386SX wrote:

With a CRT monitor still today it delivers in my opinion one if not the BEST quality ever and smooth experience.

...Are you suggesting it is in some way superior to what a modern PC (or a $50 DVD player) can do?

I couldn't say it was or was not superior technically. Probably there's space for discussing both possibilities. If you try for example a game on a Commodore 64 real console with the bad RF video output on old crt tv, and after that you try on a PC the same game on a software based Commodore 64 emulator on an high res IPS LCD with HDMI octa-core based and OS, which game experience is better?

At first if we immediately compare many would say the second but we need to think it was a dedicated hw solution with its ram, processor, timings, filters (good or bad) running by itself with JUST that task to do.
It maybe had its flaws cause compared to newer solutions, the first thing you felt was that a modern direct hdmi or vga connection (without the passhrough cable) got better output signals cause we could get signal cable noises/excessive smoothness. But with this cards we must consider a real CRT NATIVE resolution (like 800x600) similar to the real dvd resolution and not all the upscaling lcd stuff resulting with an almost pixel-to-pixel ratio, IMHO.
If you can pass over the softness of the vga passthrough cable and some less saturated colors, we could appreciate the really good quality of the video decoding resulting and well hidden mpeg noise. But the thing that for me make it epic is smoothness and frame rate stability you immediately appreciate.

well to take it to another place, I have a genesis emulator and a real genesis, and let me just say I prefer it emulated, no strange lag spikes

386SX wrote:

It maybe had its flaws cause compared to newer solutions, the first thing you felt was that a modern direct hdmi or vga connection (without the passhrough cable) got better output signals cause we could get signal cable noises/excessive smoothness. But with this cards we must consider a real CRT NATIVE resolution (like 800x600) similar to the real dvd resolution and not all the upscaling lcd stuff resulting with an almost pixel-to-pixel ratio, IMHO.
If you can pass over the softness of the vga passthrough cable and some less saturated colors, we could appreciate the really good quality of the video decoding resulting and well hidden mpeg noise. But the thing that for me make it epic is smoothness and frame rate stability you immediately appreciate.

But you can still run most modern video cards at 800x600, and even plug them into a CRT if you wanted to. And you could get all the smoothness and frame rate stability that you could possibly want.

Of course I understand there are still Reasons why someone might want to use old hardware for this purpose, I just find it odd that you are suggesting it has some inherent superiority. (For all I know, maybe it does; that's why I'm asking.)

well to take it to another place, I have a genesis emulator and a real genesis, and let me just say I prefer it emulated, no strange lag spikes

Well that is a case in wich a sw emulator can help but I usually prefer hardware in that case too cause if a game had bugs it must be played with those bugs to be time correct. 😁
There're probably games in every console that pushed too much the hardware or was just not well coded, resulting in laggy frames or errors. But if I have to mention a well known game called Stunts, would you fix the 5th gear 245mph bug? Eh eh

except the laggy game is Sonic 2 🤣. it shouldn't have been so yes I go software for it 🤣.

386SX wrote:

obobskivich wrote:

AFAIK none of the 3dfx cards actually will do anything for h/w DVD decoding.

I could be wrong but I remember that somewhere the Voodoo3 3000 (only the 3000 btw...(?)) were advertized with some hardware color transformation assisting... did anyone remember? 😁

That's probably true (cards from that era should do color space conversion), but that's not MPEG2 specific. It does neither MC nor iDCT.
So, not nothing, but much less than Rage 128.

Jorpho wrote:

386SX wrote:

It maybe had its flaws cause compared to newer solutions, the first thing you felt was that a modern direct hdmi or vga connection (without the passhrough cable) got better output signals cause we could get signal cable noises/excessive smoothness. But with this cards we must consider a real CRT NATIVE resolution (like 800x600) similar to the real dvd resolution and not all the upscaling lcd stuff resulting with an almost pixel-to-pixel ratio, IMHO.
If you can pass over the softness of the vga passthrough cable and some less saturated colors, we could appreciate the really good quality of the video decoding resulting and well hidden mpeg noise. But the thing that for me make it epic is smoothness and frame rate stability you immediately appreciate.

But you can still run most modern video cards at 800x600, and even plug them into a CRT if you wanted to. And you could get all the smoothness and frame rate stability that you could possibly want.

Of course I understand there are still Reasons why someone might want to use old hardware for this purpose, I just find it odd that you are suggesting it has some inherent superiority. (For all I know, maybe it does; that's why I'm asking.)

Surely, even if we should use an HDMI external converter to get VGA analogic signal.

Obviously we was talking at "time correct configurations" so nowdays it would be absurd (and "impossible" on driver side) to run this card on newer configs.

But with the early 2000's configs I would use it if I'd choose a CRT monitor and older os.
I know it's difficult to explain when you test hardware by 'feelings' but it's like listening a music written for the 50's with an old disc on an old valves amplifier or the same music in digital format nowdays with modern stuff (not involving the "nostalgic" side). Sometimes I don't think that newer stuff means necessary better experience nor it add something better.

I have the feeling that beside very powerful systems, many softwares nowdays asks immense amount of resources to even do same things and it's not necessary the meaning of smoothness or stability. It's like to go shopping with a 400hp big caravan on a 15mph limit road for a quarter mile road only.

386SX wrote:

I know it's difficult to explain when you test hardware by 'feelings' but it's like listening a music written for the 50's with an old disc on an old valves amplifier or the same music in digital format nowdays with modern stuff (not involving the "nostalgic" side).

As DVDs were digital to begin with, there is no comparison. Data is data.

I have the feeling that beside very powerful systems, many softwares nowdays asks immense amount of resources to even do same things and it's not necessary the meaning of smoothness or stability.

DVD software certainly does not take an immense amount of resources. (Maybe if you start getting into color-correcting pixel shaders, but that's such a mess I don't think most people even know about it.)

But I guess we're getting off-topic now.

Well, it's a nice discussion for a future thread. 😉