TheAbandonwareGuy wrote:

Yeah but first Titan's will drop down to be 20 dollar cards for like 2 years.

Doubtful. They sit right in the middle of mainstream (GeForce) and pro cards (Quadro) with somewhat limited quantity. Will be cheap sure, but not dirt cheap.

TheAbandonwareGuy wrote:

dexvx wrote:

The number of approaching 20 year old GPU's with excellent condition box and all accessories is so small. Now only include top of the line GPU's, and you can get a good idea of how rare they actually are.

10+ years from now I can imagine Nvidia Titan's with full box/accessories to be worth quite a bit.

Yeah but first Titan's will drop down to be 20 dollar cards for like 2 years.

Seems doubtful, but possible for bare cards and/or their Quadro equivalents. Certainly not for fully boxed cards. The best comparison would be SLI/XFire cards on a stick. But usually those cards are 2x [Not top end or downclocked GPU]. Titan's are the best GPU of their generation and way more quantity limited.

"Fully boxed" tag have no value for this cards. There's nothing interesting in there.

The Serpent Rider wrote:

"Fully boxed" tag have no value for this cards. There's nothing interesting in there.

Fully boxed items go for way more than their bare counterparts. You can argue that have no value in the sense that it does not contribute to a system build. But you cannot argue that it does not contribute from a monetary perspective.

Plus there are different types of vintage PC hardware collectors, just like any other collectible. Take the toy market for example. There are the ones that don't mind loose toys in "played with" condition, and there are others that must have them mint-in-box or mint-on-card. They're trying to capture a piece of that era when those collectibles were brand new, almost like trying to turn back the clock.

How many of us lived when these things were new and think fondly on what it was like to play on such hardware, or a friend's hardware? Or we just didn't have the money and stared at pictures and benchmarks in magazines and online wishing it were in our hands? That kind of emotional appeal commands a high premium!

dexvx wrote:

So I checked the history. Looks like GeForce 256 DDR was released Feb 2000 (I actually found an Anandtech review of one in Dec 1999, so that seems a little inaccurate)..

Is there any way to know for sure? If it were not released before 2000, my OCD would hesitate to put it in the category of 1999 computer builds.

Wikipedia claims the SDR version was released in 1999, and the DDR following that in 2000.

One day I'll have one. Definitely a must have card (DDR).

silikone wrote:

dexvx wrote:

Is there any way to know for sure? If it were not released before 2000, my OCD would hesitate to put it in the category of 1999 computer builds.

From my memory, NV10 DDR was extremely volume limited in late 1999, but it did exist. The launch was actually more of a soft launch because DDR SD/SGRAM was more abundant then. Basically when DDR got volume (Feb/Mar 2000), NV10 was already replaced by NV15 (April 2000) as the flagship. Add to that the cheaper NV11 offering similar performance, it made NV10 unviable in a very short amount of time. Thus the rarity (yes I only thought about this AFTER I created this thread).

Here are the in era reviews from Tomshardware, Anandtech, Firingsquad. Obviously Anandtech seems to be using an Nvidia Reference, so they got their early. But at least Tomshardware is using a retail Leadtek card. So it depends on how you want to look at it. Certainly the NDA was lifted

Leadtek GeForce 256 DDR, Jan 7, 2000.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/leadtek-w … iew,157-12.html

Reference GeForce 256 DDR, Dec 25, 1999.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/429

Asus V6800 (GeForce 256 DDR), Dec 18, 1999
Since Firingsquad has gone away, tweakers.net has a reference to review posted on Dec 18, 1999.
https://tweakers.net/nieuws/7733/asus-v6800-p … ddr-review.html

dexvx wrote:

From my memory, NV10 DDR was extremely volume limited in late 1999, but it did exist. The launch was actually more of a soft lau […]
Show full quote

silikone wrote:

dexvx wrote:

Is there any way to know for sure? If it were not released before 2000, my OCD would hesitate to put it in the category of 1999 computer builds.

From my memory, NV10 DDR was extremely volume limited in late 1999, but it did exist. The launch was actually more of a soft launch because DDR SD/SGRAM was more abundant then. Basically when DDR got volume (Feb/Mar 2000), NV10 was already replaced by NV15 (April 2000) as the flagship. Add to that the cheaper NV11 offering similar performance, it made NV10 unviable in a very short amount of time. Thus the rarity (yes I only thought about this AFTER I created this thread).

Here are the in era reviews from Tomshardware, Anandtech, Firingsquad. Obviously Anandtech seems to be using an Nvidia Reference, so they got their early. But at least Tomshardware is using a retail Leadtek card. So it depends on how you want to look at it. Certainly the NDA was lifted

Leadtek GeForce 256 DDR, Jan 7, 2000.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/leadtek-w … iew,157-12.html

Reference GeForce 256 DDR, Dec 25, 1999.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/429

Asus V6800 (GeForce 256 DDR), Dec 18, 1999
Since Firingsquad has gone away, tweakers.net has a reference to review posted on Dec 18, 1999.
https://tweakers.net/nieuws/7733/asus-v6800-p … ddr-review.html

https://web.archive.org/web/20040831113301/ht … /nvidiageforce/

There's the review from FiringSquad.com (It took me a minute to get the wayback machine to comply with my demands)

BTW... is anyone actually using these in a build? It seems like a lot of you guys are buying for collecting purposes

my Erazor X SDR has been in use at least once or twice a week for the last 2 months in my Win98/P3 933 machine.

I just want my damn Creative GeForce 256 DDR back.

TheAbandonwareGuy wrote:

BTW... is anyone actually using these in a build? It seems like a lot of you guys are buying for collecting purposes

my Erazor X SDR has been in use at least once or twice a week for the last 2 months in my Win98/P3 933 machine.

Good point 😀 These are more of a collectibles than actually useful GPU, just like R100 Radeons... for me at least. I currently have three GF 256 SDR (2x Elsa, 120/166, 1x Manli, 110/143), two Quadro SDR (64MB, 135/166), one GF 256 DDR (32MB, 120/300, half burned RAMDAC) and three Quadro DDR (64MB, 135/333) 😊 Last year, I've tried to make a period-correct 99' build using 600MHz Athlon Slot A, AMD-750 board and GF 256 SDR. It turned out 99' build is not fast enough for 99' game (Rally Championship)... while it was somewhat playable at 1024x768 around 40 fps, Pentium 4 + GF4 can run it 1600x1200 2xAA, 4xAF at 50+ fps.

Anyway, while not very useful for my gaming purposes, I can at least use these GPUs for my next article which will cover the ~2000 - 2005 era. The Quadro DDR can even overclock rather good hwbot.org/submission/3368581_havli_3dma ... 3343_marks and should be able to beat GF2 GTS at this clock I think.

TheAbandonwareGuy wrote:

BTW... is anyone actually using these in a build? It seems like a lot of you guys are buying for collecting purposes

my Erazor X SDR has been in use at least once or twice a week for the last 2 months in my Win98/P3 933 machine.

To be honest.. No. The GeForce 256/2 hardware are in a shitty place, they are for 99/00 and to me those years are all about Voodoo cards (Voodoo 3 for 99, Voodoo 4/5 for 00). To make matters worse, these nvidia cards perform like shit when using glide wrappers. So for 99/00 I tend to skip these, and for 01 builds I immediately go for a Radeon 8500. Actually, I tend to never use a GeForce card up until the 6800GT, there is no reason when there are 3dfx or ATi alternatives.

dexvx wrote:

From my memory, NV10 DDR was extremely volume limited in late 1999, but it did exist. The launch was actually more of a soft launch because DDR SD/SGRAM was more abundant then. Basically when DDR got volume (Feb/Mar 2000), NV10 was already replaced by NV15 (April 2000) as the flagship. Add to that the cheaper NV11 offering similar performance, it made NV10 unviable in a very short amount of time. Thus the rarity (yes I only thought about this AFTER I created this thread).

My Creative GeForce256 Annihilator Pro were bought 23rd of December 1999, so the GeForce DDR made it to the end users before 2000.

TheAbandonwareGuy wrote:

https://web.archive.org/web/20040831113301/ht … /nvidiageforce/ […]
Show full quote

https://web.archive.org/web/20040831113301/ht … /nvidiageforce/

There's the review from FiringSquad.com (It took me a minute to get the wayback machine to comply with my demands)

BTW... is anyone actually using these in a build? It seems like a lot of you guys are buying for collecting purposes

my Erazor X SDR has been in use at least once or twice a week for the last 2 months in my Win98/P3 933 machine.

I use my Geforce 256 daily in my pentium II along with a voodoo SLI for the glide, its a period correct machine. It runs almost anything uptill serious sam.
The card has no collectors value to me, I just wanted to use it since its the first GPU like we know it today and didn't want to use a voodoo 3 but a voodoo 2 SLI, voodoo 3 is reserved for a ss7 or early PIII/k7

Could someone with a GeForce 256 do me a favour and run DXCapsViewer on it? (You can find it in the DirectX SDK, or in the newer Windows SDKs).
Then do File -> Save entire tree to file, and you should get a dxview.log file on your desktop.
I'd like to have that file.
More specifically, I am curious whether or not D3DTEXOPCAPS_DOTPRODUCT3 is supported on the GeForce 256.
It was heavily marketed as 'per-pixel lighting' with the GeForce2 series, but I don't think I ever saw it mentioned with the GeForce 256.
On the other hand, the GeForce2 was often described as a two-pipeline version of the GeForce 256, and as far as I know, they are otherwise identical in terms of features. So I have always wondered if the GeForce 256 supported DOT3, but it just wasn't marketed for some reason, or if it was only introduced with the GeForce2.

Scali wrote:

More specifically, I am curious whether or not D3DTEXOPCAPS_DOTPRODUCT3 is supported on the GeForce 256.
It was heavily marketed as 'per-pixel lighting' with the GeForce2 series, but I don't think I ever saw it mentioned with the GeForce 256.

I too am curious about the alleged Geforce 2 shading. http://www.nvidia.com/object/feature_nsr.html
I'd love to see some statistics of this in action.

Yes, GeForce 256 have full support for DOT3 bumpmapping, but it's quite slow.
http://ixbtlabs.com/articles/gf2hwtl

Yeah I don't get the fascination either but the GeForce has a name that is still used probably has alot to do with it.

For what the cards do their is nothing special about them, their were gaziillions of GeForce sdrs/ddrs/2/gts/ultra/ti/2mx/4mx440/MX 4000 basically any dx7 NVIDIA card you can buy dirt cheap.

dirkmirk wrote:

For what the cards do their is nothing special about them, their were gaziillions of GeForce sdrs/ddrs/2/gts/ultra/ti/2mx/4mx440/MX 4000 basically any dx7 NVIDIA card you can buy dirt cheap.

No, but they were the first GeForce, the first 'GPU', the first with hardware T&L, the first with per-pixel lighting etc.
It's the dawn of a new era, so it's historical significance mostly. Building a system with a GeForce 256 gives you a nice hands-on feel of how this new era started.

So, the ebay auction of a boxed card that was linked in a previous page is already at US $192,50 with 2 days to go. I don't know if anybody here is bidding on it, but if that's the case I just wanted to mention that you guys are insane 😁

Although I agree it's an interesting card for being the first GeForce, and it still makes a good card for Quake 2 when paired with a Pentium II or III.