It's a slow card.

You'll see it actually accelerate on a Pentium 133 and older CPUs. Anything newer will likely outperform it in software rendering. If you lower the resolution to 512x384 it might help a bit with the frame rate.

Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2024-02-25, 14:19:

It's a slow card.

You'll see it actually accelerate on a Pentium 133 and older CPUs. Anything newer will likely outperform it in software rendering. If you lower the resolution to 512x384 it might help a bit with the frame rate.

Thanks so using software renderer on p2 cpu is better idea

rain wrote on 2024-02-25, 15:00:

Thanks so using software renderer on p2 cpu is better idea

You will likely get better frame rates with software rendering on a P2, but there is a trade off. Software rendering normally uses 8-bit color while 3D acceleration (on Virge cards) uses 16-bit color. Because of that, using the software renderer often produces undesirable color banding. Here's a comparison from Tomb Raider to illustrate the point (look at the shadow on the snow):

Additionally, you don't get bilinear filtering and perspective correction when using software rendering, which results in a more pixelated, shimmery look.

Virge was the famous at the time for being the worlds first Decellrator.

It is a useful card though, especially for dos.
You have access to the few S3D exclusive games
3D Accelerated Games List (Proprietary APIs - No 3DFX/Direct3D)

Like Tomb raider often its a trade off where software is faster but S3D gives higher detail, plenty of videos exist on youtube comparing but here is a starter.
https://www.youtube.com/@vetzRetro/search?query=virge

and ignoring the 3D, its a very good dos 2D card.

Agreed, I look at the Virge as a very good DOS card, with good Windows acceleration.

The basic 3D support is really an added bonus. If you want 3D then pair it with a Voodoo. That's what I did back in the day.

Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2024-02-25, 16:01:

You will likely get better frame rates with software rendering on a P2, but there is a trade off. Software rendering normally us […]
Show full quote

rain wrote on 2024-02-25, 15:00:

Thanks so using software renderer on p2 cpu is better idea

You will likely get better frame rates with software rendering on a P2, but there is a trade off. Software rendering normally uses 8-bit color while 3D acceleration (on Virge cards) uses 16-bit color. Because of that, using the software renderer often produces undesirable color banding. Here's a comparison from Tomb Raider to illustrate the point (look at the shadow on the snow):

Additionally, you don't get bilinear filtering and perspective correction when using software rendering, which results in a more pixelated, shimmery look.

Software rendering is the way to go if you want period correct.

vvbee wrote on 2024-02-27, 04:15:

Software rendering is the way to go if you want period correct.

I suppose it depends on how you look at that time period. Many folks were still using 486 systems with ISA graphics cards during the mid '90s.

On the other hand, the original 3DFX Voodoo card came out in late 1996. While the S3 Virge and the Rendition Verite were available a bit earlier that year. People who purchased a new, high-end PC in late '96 or at the start of '97 likely had one of these early 3D accelerators at their disposal.

Software rendering in those games was interesting and very optimized but only faster because those early accelerators had much more to render to improve graphic with much heavier rendering effects and filtering. So the weak Virge or Rage chips did what they could while many were only looking at the frame rates instead of the new improved early 3D hardware accelerated in-game scenarios.

I use an S3 Virge/DX 4MB in my DOS/WIn3.11 build, running an IBM PR166+ 133MHz CPU and it performs wonderfully, but that's becasue its being used for DOS gaming at 640x480 or lower in most titles at that slower processor speed.

I went with the S3 Virge/DX simply becasue it has such good DOS compatibility in a wide range of games (mainly 2D), and they're still readily available for a low price. You can read about that build at the link below if you're interested.

Beyond that, yeah, there are definitely better performance options for a build like yours, and for 3D accelerated games.

I still like the S3 cards though because they work so well for older non 3D accelerated games, and they do work "reasonably well" with some 3D games, especially at lower resolutions. I also like the "period correctness" of it. 😜

https://theclassicgeek.blogspot.com/2024/02/a … s-3x-retro.html

It should also be noted that Virge DX cards come with a wide range of clocks. Unbranded "no-name" models usually feature a modest core clock of 50 MHz and have slower memory, while high end offerings (e.g. from Diamond) work at 72 MHz and have faster memory. You can see this on the Virge DX page of the VGA Museum.

While a difference of 20 MHz may not seem like much from today's perspective, it was a game changer back in the day. Performance could go from 10-12 FPS on slower cards to 16-18 FPS on faster cards in games like Tomb Raider. You can check the clocks of your card from the MCLK.EXE utility, which can also be used for overclocking. Note that heatsinks and active cooling might be needed for some overclocking scenarios.

Also while not important for frame rates the final quality of the video output signal could change a lot on those cheaper pcb with simpler layouts and components, decreasing the quality of these products in reviews or discussions. While the Virge or Rage series were not as fast as expected in such complex market, higher end quality product and a modern style driver quality would have better find positive opinions.

Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2024-03-02, 06:34:

It should also be noted that Virge DX cards come with a wide range of clocks. Unbranded "no-name" models usually feature a modest core clock of 50 MHz and have slower memory, while high end offerings (e.g. from Diamond) work at 72 MHz and have faster memory. You can see this on the Virge DX page of the VGA Museum.

While a difference of 20 MHz may not seem like much from today's perspective, it was a game changer back in the day. Performance could go from 10-12 FPS on slower cards to 16-18 FPS on faster cards in games like Tomb Raider. You can check the clocks of your card from the MCLK.EXE utility, which can also be used for overclocking. Note that heatsinks and active cooling might be needed for some overclocking scenarios.

Actually, lowest end Virge DXs where clocked at 45MHz (I have one of them), while 99% of their video chips are rock solid when overclocked to 70MHz, and the best samples can reach 83+ MHz (I saw someone write that he reached 90 MHz overclocking) .
The difference between 45 MHz and 83MHz is HUGE. And it is even more between original 50MHz S3 Virge or 45MHz Virge VX and highly overclocked DX.
Also geometry part of Virge's rendering is done by CPU and performance varies greatly between different systems.
If you compare combination of i486 + stock S3 Virge VX with combination of Pentium 4 + highly overclocked Virge DX, you will see multiple difference in performance.
Theoretically S3 Virge can can be even faster than 3dfx Voodoo 1, since the latter does not scale as well with fast processor, and is not compatible with fast processors at all.
Maybe I'll try someday to measure the performance of my S3 cards by putting them in a Core i7 4770k-based system. I'm wondering if Virge can beat Voodoo?

Kruton 9000 wrote on 2024-03-05, 07:10:

... I'm wondering if Virge can beat Voodoo?

That is a fool's errand unless you minimize fill and texture operations, which does not correspond to any supported game or a reasonable setting, afaik.

I can only imagine Virge beating V1/V2 by virtue of running some certain naive Direct3D games that don't bother with secondary devices (to the point of not initializing any device at all if the primary/host card is 2D only).

It def doesn't have any of the blending functions Voodoo has or even the modulation the other not-quite-voodoo cards had.