RaiderOfLostVoodoo wrote on 2022-11-12, 03:58:

maxtherabbit wrote on 2022-11-12, 02:43:

Idk what planet y'all are living on who are suggesting voodoos, they are the literal opposite of cheap.

TNT2 M64

A PCI TNT isn't that much cheaper than a Voodoo1.

I don't know, I got the TNT2 M64 in PCI locally for $15, any Voodoo that doesn't go under 50. I live in the EU.

anyone got framerate data for tnt2 m64 or gf2 mx running on a p133/166? how do they compare to voodoo1?

Wow I haven’t checked the post for a while and there’s a lot here!
Thanks for your responses!

To clear things up a bit I was able to pick up the Pentium computer just a quick tram ride away from Melbourne for $50. Not the lightest thing to lug home but easier than a eMac G4!
The reason why I got the computer so cheap is because the seller didn’t know what it was and I took a gamble. Came with 64mb of ram, 12x cd drive and a 10gb quantum fireball (replacement).

I certainly agree with people that getting a little beefier of a processor with an agp slot to sport really would boost the options available to me. But half of me really wants to see how far I can get with what I’ve got haha.

I came back home for a couple of days from Melbourne (moved for uni) and searched through the parts I’ve got kicking around.
Turns out these are the Pentium I own: 90, 133, 166, 200mmx OD and 233mmx. So I do have upgrade options in the future.

It’s a shame how hard period correct PCI cards have become to find. I’d love a voodoo but I don’t have the budget for it.

I'd second looking for a G200 or G450 PCI (sometimes listed as 7003-03) as well, just to keep the option open -- Matrox's relative obscurity these days outside hospitals and hobbyists seems to keep it relatively cheap; about $30 for a PCI G450 here in the US taking a quick look on eBay as the OptiPlex I have with a 3D Rage Pro could really use a better GPU, and it doesn't have an AGP slot despite being i440bx.

kennyPENTIUMpowers wrote on 2022-11-12, 12:57:

anyone got framerate data for tnt2 m64 or gf2 mx running on a p133/166? how do they compare to voodoo1?

I've never seen such tests, but I can imagine that results will be really disappointing.
I would expect that avg framerate in games in 640x480 16bit might be even on pair with V1, but I'm pretty sure that min framerate will be worse making games much harder to play...

You can read this thread. OP tested M64 PCI with few Pentiums I (including P233MMX) and wasn't happy with results. You can ask him for more detailed results.

I accidentally tested the TNT2 M64 a couple of days back on the P2 350 (100MHz FSB) and the framerate in 3DM99 games didn't fill me with any enthusiasm, it will be even sadder for the weaker P1 on the slower FSB. I see it that way about playing in 640x480 and low details.

Proper TNT2 M64 is faster than OG TNT, which was Voodoo 2 competitor.

I know this is not popular but I use a FX5200 PCI with a Pentium 100mhz (intel 430fx) and I now prefer it in dos and Win95 OSR2 over a S3 Savage4.
It's faster in Quake 1, has better image quality and in win95 games - The Need for Speed: Special Edition, MDK and Pandemonium 2 run with a higher frame rate.
Looking over https://gona.mactar.hu/DOS_TESTS/ it is one of the more compatible cards in dos.
It was the only cheap pci card I could find but it has been a surprise. Also has VBE 3 support so I can set 100hz +refresh rates in dos.
The card seems to be disliked for it's XP and DX9 performance, neither of which are a concern to me. Tht latest game I tried with it is DX8 and it fully supports all features of that ver.

Riikcakirds wrote on 2022-11-13, 22:56:

I know this is not popular but I use a FX5200 PCI with a Pentium 100mhz (intel 430fx) and I now prefer it in dos and Win95 OSR2 […]
Show full quote

I know this is not popular but I use a FX5200 PCI with a Pentium 100mhz (intel 430fx) and I now prefer it in dos and Win95 OSR2 over a S3 Savage4.
It's faster in Quake 1, has better image quality and in win95 games - The Need for Speed: Special Edition, MDK and Pandemonium 2 run with a higher frame rate.
Looking over https://gona.mactar.hu/DOS_TESTS/ it is one of the more compatible cards in dos.
It was the only cheap pci card I could find but it has been a surprise. Also has VBE 3 support so I can set 100hz +refresh rates in dos.
The card seems to be disliked for it's XP and DX9 performance, neither of which are a concern to me. Tht latest game I tried with it is DX8 and it fully supports all features of that ver.

Honestly a great choice, I have one in one of my 440FX boards

Riikcakirds wrote on 2022-11-13, 22:56:

I know this is not popular but I use a FX5200 PCI with a Pentium 100mhz (intel 430fx) and I now prefer it in dos and Win95 OSR2 over a S3 Savage4.
It's faster in Quake 1, has better image quality and in win95 games - The Need for Speed: Special Edition, MDK and Pandemonium 2 run with a higher frame rate.

can u provide any benchmark scores to illustrate the point?
also i was under the belief that NFSse didnt use 3d acceration.. that wasnt introduced until NFSse2..

but yes ... the FX, TNT2m64 and GF2mx are pretty much the only affordable (ie didnt cost double the rest of the system) and decent options that you dont have to spend months looking for..

Riikcakirds wrote on 2022-11-13, 22:56:

Tht latest game I tried with it is DX8 and it fully supports all features of that ver.

Sure, the FX5200 can handle DX8 games, but not in combination with the P100 on the i430FX, right?

kennyPENTIUMpowers wrote on 2022-11-14, 06:30:

can u provide any benchmark scores to illustrate the point? also i was under the belief that NFSse didnt use 3d acceration.. tha […]
Show full quote

Riikcakirds wrote on 2022-11-13, 22:56:

I know this is not popular but I use a FX5200 PCI with a Pentium 100mhz (intel 430fx) and I now prefer it in dos and Win95 OSR2 over a S3 Savage4.
It's faster in Quake 1, has better image quality and in win95 games - The Need for Speed: Special Edition, MDK and Pandemonium 2 run with a higher frame rate.

can u provide any benchmark scores to illustrate the point?
also i was under the belief that NFSse didnt use 3d acceration.. that wasnt introduced until NFSse2..

but yes ... the FX, TNT2m64 and GF2mx are pretty much the only affordable (ie didnt cost double the rest of the system) and decent options that you dont have to spend months looking for..

The Need for Speed: Special Edition, I run the windows version, it uses directx2, don't know if that counts as 3d compared to the dos version. It does run faster than the dos version which I would not have expected. Using savage4 in windows is slower only by 3fps. I use Nvidia driver versions 43.45 or 45.23 under win95.
In MDK I get 52 with savage4 and 55 with fx5200.

Ydee wrote on 2022-11-14, 14:55:

Riikcakirds wrote on 2022-11-13, 22:56:

Tht latest game I tried with it is DX8 and it fully supports all features of that ver.

Sure, the FX5200 can handle DX8 games, but not in combination with the P100 on the i430FX, right?

The only game I played that would not work on Savage4 and I needed to use the fx5200 and minimum of directx8 was Worms Blast. It ran fine but is a single screen game, a bit like tetris.
I think the 64MB ram helped, which is a lot for a P100 and win95 (but maxable cacheable amount of ram for 430fx). I can overclock it to 133 and it works but I like 100% stability and p100 is what I had in 1996.

Riikcakirds wrote on 2022-11-14, 17:13:

The Need for Speed: Special Edition, I run the windows version, it uses directx2, don't know if that counts as 3d compared to the dos version.

DirectX is a collection of APIs. The 3D graphics part is Direct3D which is not supported by the game.

@Riikcakirds could you please run glQuake timedemo? I'm currious how many frames you'll get. 😀

Riikcakirds wrote on 2022-11-13, 22:56:

I know this is not popular but I use a FX5200 PCI.... Also has VBE 3 support so I can set 100hz +refresh rates in dos.

Really? My experience is that no card after the TNT2 implemented the VESA standard fully, and just ignore the command to increase the refresh rate in DOS.

badmojo wrote on 2022-11-14, 22:25:

Riikcakirds wrote on 2022-11-13, 22:56:

I know this is not popular but I use a FX5200 PCI.... Also has VBE 3 support so I can set 100hz +refresh rates in dos.

Really? My experience is that no card after the TNT2 implemented the VESA standard fully, and just ignore the command to increase the refresh rate in DOS.

I use Unirefresh and it works with both a PCI Fx5200 and AGP 7900GS. This is in pure dos not win9x dos box. Later nvidia cards might work but I have not tried anything newer than a 7900GS. The great thing is you can set really high refresh rates with these newer cards, 150hz+ with the crt being the limiting factor. Vesa games (some up to 1600x1200) all default to 60hz but it is just headache inducing on a 21" + crt monitor.
That is one of the benefits of Nvidia over ATI/AMD in DOS, they fully support VBE3 while ATI's later cards only supported up to VBE2.

Riikcakirds wrote on 2022-11-14, 22:52:

I use Unirefresh and it works with both a PCI Fx5200 and AGP 7900GS. This is in pure dos not win9x dos box. Later nvidia cards might work but I have not tried anything newer than a 7900GS. The great thing is you can set really high refresh rates with these newer cards, 150hz+ with the crt being the limiting factor. Vesa games (some up to 1600x1200) all default to 60hz but it is just headache inducing on a 21" + crt monitor.
That is one of the benefits of Nvidia over ATI/AMD in DOS, they fully support VBE3 while ATI's later cards only supported up to VBE2.

Ah well maybe my memory is failing me, as it does. But here's a thread I recall reading when I was having the problem with an FX5200: Re: UniRefresh no longer works on nVidia's latest.

I'm so far winning a GF4 MX4000 PCI which is said to be on par with an original 2MX for about $17. Could be another avenue to keep in mind. Seeing as it's a really low end card for 2004, it might be easier to find as PCI than something high end as something to shove in a Dell Dimension.

lepidotós wrote on 2022-11-15, 01:30:

I'm so far winning a GF4 MX4000 PCI which is said to be on par with an original 2MX for about $17. Could be another avenue to keep in mind. Seeing as it's a really low end card for 2004, it might be easier to find as PCI than something high end as something to shove in a Dell Dimension.

I bought a GF4 MX4000 PCI recently ..got super lucky too as its one of the rare 128bit memory bus models which makes it a direct replacement for a GF4 MX440, saved me a ton of cash as PCI MX 440s tend to be expensive from the ones I have seen on eBay. (Found the easiest way to tell for the GF4 MX cards for mem bus size is look at how many vram ics there are 2/4 is normally 32/64 bit with 8 ICs usually being 128bit)