CL-5446 being better than S3 Trio64v+ ?

Discussion about old graphics cards, monitors and video related things.

Re: CL-5446 being better than S3 Trio64v+ ?

Postby zyga64 » 2019-4-13 @ 20:00

brostenen wrote:You know... Cannon Fodder crashing with and without UniVBE loaded.


I know that this thread is a bit old but..

wbc's s3vbefix helps with Cannon Fodder on S3 cards ! Even those with VBE1.2 bios. At least it helps my S3Trio64V+ (1MB, VBE1.2). Not to mention 2.0 ones (I've tested S3Trio3d 2x and S3 Virge DX with 2.0 bios).
1) SCAMP /286@20 /4MB /TVGA9000C /CMI8330
2) i420EX /486DX33 /8MB /Trio64V+ /YMF718
3) i430HX /P233MMX /64MB /VirgeDX+3Dfx /Vibra16s
4) i440BX /P!!! 450 /256MB /TNT /AWE64
5) i865G /E3200 /1GB /Ti4200 /YMF724
zyga64
Member
 
Posts: 165
Joined: 2014-3-12 @ 14:38
Location: Poland

Re: CL-5446 being better than S3 Trio64v+ ?

Postby kjliew » 2019-4-14 @ 00:27

The Graphic history of wikipedia speaks very well of why Cirrus had failed to compete with S3. Their equivalent product were late, and S3 won the race to be 1st in the market for PCI priced for the segment.

"...By the mid-1990s, when PC's had migrated to the PCI bus, Cirrus had fallen behind S3 and Trident Microsystems..."
I believe this was the chronology of how both companies launched their product lines back then.
- S3 Trio32/64
- CL 5430/5434
- S3 Trio64V+
- CL 5440/5446
- S3 ViRGE
- CL 546x Laguna

So in end, it was CL5430/5434 that was actually competing with S3 Trio64V+, while the later CL5440/5446 was competing against S3 ViRGE. This was how I remember back then in the mid/late 90's of Asia market when I was building PCs for college. The market was simply dominated by S3 products top to bottom for the average PC builders, for someone who was not looking at Matrox or ATI, which was an entirely different priced segment.
kjliew
Oldbie
 
Posts: 531
Joined: 2004-1-08 @ 03:03

Re: CL-5446 being better than S3 Trio64v+ ?

Postby Jo22 » 2019-4-14 @ 09:26

CL-GD5428/5430 were also used in Japan, on the PC-98 platform (NEC PC-9821)..
yawetaG and me had a little talk about SVGA chips on that platform a while ago.
The Cirrus, as well as other chipsets, were increasingly used about the time Win95 became popular.
Being VGA cards, more or less, they sometimes had issues with the DOS games of the same platform that expected a real GDC.
Here's a site about a PC-98 "laptop" that has a Cirrus chip: http://usamimi.b.ribbon.to/pc9821ts.htm
Text is in Japanese, but the pictures are in English. ;)
"Time, it seems, doesn't flow. For some it's fast, for some it's slow.
In what to one race is no time at all, another race can rise and fall..." - The Minstrel

//My video channel//
User avatar
Jo22
l33t
 
Posts: 3989
Joined: 2009-12-13 @ 07:06
Location: Europe

Re: CL-5446 being better than S3 Trio64v+ ?

Postby dr.zeissler » 2019-4-14 @ 09:40

CPU: PII 133-333 MOBO: SNI-D981 RAM: 512- FDD: Dualfloppy 3,5"HD/5,25"HD - 3,5"HD - 5,25"DD ISA-Catweasel HDD: 2x40GB - DVD
ISA(3): Audician32-S2Dreamblaster - GusACE PCI(3): Monster3D- Intel NW AGP(1): 3dfx V3-3000
dr.zeissler
Oldbie
 
Posts: 1767
Joined: 2011-9-28 @ 15:33

Re: CL-5446 being better than S3 Trio64v+ ?

Postby kjliew » 2019-4-14 @ 21:51

Jo22 wrote:CL-GD5428/5430 were also used in Japan, on the PC-98 platform (NEC PC-9821)..

It was CL-GD5428. Well, the CL-GD5424/5426/5428/5429 was the golden era for Cirrus Logic for the VLB market and a very successful product line for 486/586VLB. S3 competition wasn't there, too expensive for mainstream OEM market in Asia, and Trident competing product was crappy until the much later TGUI9440 series. Perhaps, too successful that the company failed to notice the future of PCI.
kjliew
Oldbie
 
Posts: 531
Joined: 2004-1-08 @ 03:03

Re: CL-5446 being better than S3 Trio64v+ ?

Postby matze79 » 2019-4-15 @ 13:15

The Cirrus Logic also needs no TSR for reaching full speed.

The S3...

You may want to watch Phils Video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_5suEoXTc8
https://dosreloaded.de - The German Retro DOS PC Community
https://www.retroianer.de
matze79
Oldbie
 
Posts: 1623
Joined: 2014-12-12 @ 14:25
Location: Germany, Frankonia

Re: CL-5446 being better than S3 Trio64v+ ?

Postby ElBrunzy » 2019-10-03 @ 17:13

Oh! I'm so glad this thread is still alive, I was sweating bullets considering necroposting it or opening a similar thread for something regarding this one. :sweatdrop:

So here is my 2 cents, because of the trend I did try the S3 but I grew tired of its randomness: black pedestal, gray only picture, inconsistent win9x refresh frequency and whatnot I forgot. Really it's a gamble ordering them from ebay.

After reading this Brostenen post I gave a try to some of my cl-gd5446 which drag in the workshop shed and I was surprised by them quality and stability. Of course you have to give up 4mb of ram and vbe 2.0 but I realized I don't need that. So now I'm totally happy in the camp of Cirrus Logic with an intend to stay.

I would also thank Gdjacobs for giving me the idea to mix the ram of an inferior card and add it to a good one (picture quality wise). It really only allow my to notch win98 from 800x600 to 1024x768 at 16bpp, but It was a fun operation. Because I am so happy it worked (and quite proud) I attached a picture. (but beware, so many chips are 21 pins wide and not 20)
cl-gd5446-memory_swap-soj-2x512kb_2mb-heat_gun.jpg

But anyway here is my questions :
  1. I noticed some chips have a BV added to them but I cannot find a precise explanation as to what it means, CL-GD5446 vs CL-GD5446BV. Also, what about the -HC-A and -HC-B suffix ?
  2. The win98 drivers are correct imho, but I'm intrigued about this ISDcorp 2.0 for the 5446 that Matth79 mentionnned previously in this thread. I could not find it, maybe if someone still have them, it would be a good idea to put it on vogonsdrivers.
Thank you
User avatar
ElBrunzy
Member
 
Posts: 486
Joined: 2014-1-26 @ 03:50
Location: Quebec / Canada

Re: CL-5446 being better than S3 Trio64v+ ?

Postby ElBrunzy » 2019-10-16 @ 14:17

Searching for the ISD driver again I stumbled on the CL-5446 Technical Reference Manual so I found some interesting information regarding the chip nomenclature. Unfortunately both of my cards are A revision which mean they are not pc97 compliant. Maybe in a non retro-computing, or targeting a more recent era, context it would matter. Still it dont explain the BV following the 5446 number. Hope if I ever find out what it mean it wont be another deception :lol:
clgd5446.png
User avatar
ElBrunzy
Member
 
Posts: 486
Joined: 2014-1-26 @ 03:50
Location: Quebec / Canada

Previous

Return to Video

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests