VOGONS


2D cards

Topic actions

First post, by silikone

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

For 2D stuff, how much can the choice of video cards help? I've heard about some cards being slow, such as the Rendition Verite.
So for VGA, VESA, and DirectDraw rendering, which cards are best?

Do not refrain from refusing to stop hindering yourself from the opposite of watching nothing other than that which is by no means porn.

Reply 1 of 21, by vetz

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

In my experience the S3 Virge and Trio64 have excellent compatibility and are pretty quick. I also like the Matrox Millennium (and Mystique, G200 PCI) cards as they have much better signal quality for Windows usage (I like to run in 1280x1024 in Windows), but I've read they don't have the same compatibility in DOS as the S3 (though they should be abit quicker). I've never experienced any problems myself with the Matrox cards though, but then again, I'm not the biggest DOS gamer.

It also depends on what games you're gonna play and the type of system. If it's 2D games from the 2000's like Simcity 4, Civ 3, then I would not recommend getting a 90's card.

3D Accelerated Games List (Proprietary APIs - No 3DFX/Direct3D)
3D Acceleration Comparison Episodes

Reply 2 of 21, by swaaye

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

Personally I just grab a NVIDIA card like Riva TNT. Extremely fast 2D all around and they have good compatibility. Some games are troublesome though and then the S3 Virge comes out.

silikone wrote:

I've heard about some cards being slow, such as the Rendition Verite.

For the time, all Verite cards were fast at VESA modes and DirectDraw. They are ok at GUI too. It's when you need ModeX that you're in trouble because they are terribly slow at it. VGA Mode 13h 320x200 is slow too but it can be remapped to VESA with renutil.

Reply 3 of 21, by archsan

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

My favorite 2D card is 3dfx Banshee or Voodoo3. Relatively easy to find in AGP and PCI version. I'm mostly using CRT for real dos boxes though.

There is also this handy reference that you may find useful (compiled by a vogons fellow Gona):
http://gona.mactar.hu/DOS_TESTS/

Reply 4 of 21, by bushwack

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

To be more period specific I would grab a Virge variant but the Voodoo3 is a great all around card.

Reply 5 of 21, by vlask

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

For VGA/Vesa can help you this mine little benchmark.

http://www.vgamuseum.info/index.php/benchmark … tware-rendering

Won't help you with directdraw, havent found good ddraw benchmark.
Maybe test Unreal in SW mode can be little helpfull....

http://www.vgamuseum.info/index.php/benchmarks/311-unreal

Not only mine graphics cards collection at http://www.vgamuseum.info

Reply 7 of 21, by Hatta

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

That's odd. I was just testing my Mach 64 and S3 Virge this weekend. According to Winbench the S3 is about half as good as the Mach 64, but the Quake 1 benchmarks posted put Mach 64 around 100 and Virge around 130. I wonder what the deal is.

Reply 8 of 21, by Jorpho

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

Surely CPU power makes a far greater difference for these 2D games than the video card?

Reply 10 of 21, by badmojo

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
keropi wrote:

and those ARK chipset PCI cards, they seem to be the fastest IIRC

+1 for the ARK chipset for pure 2D:

Ark Logic PCI, an interesting VGA card.

Reply 11 of 21, by vlask

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
Hatta wrote:

That's odd. I was just testing my Mach 64 and S3 Virge this weekend. According to Winbench the S3 is about half as good as the Mach 64, but the Quake 1 benchmarks posted put Mach 64 around 100 and Virge around 130. I wonder what the deal is.

Quake is tested in DOS, not in windows. So drivers can make difference, higher resolution and colors (quake run in 256 color mode i think) and also virge cards have very different clocking - there are cards with 45Mhz to 60Mhz - that is big difference (also they have fpm or edo memory with different timing).

Not only mine graphics cards collection at http://www.vgamuseum.info

Reply 12 of 21, by silikone

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
vlask wrote:
For VGA/Vesa can help you this mine little benchmark. […]
Show full quote

For VGA/Vesa can help you this mine little benchmark.

http://www.vgamuseum.info/index.php/benchmark … tware-rendering

Won't help you with directdraw, havent found good ddraw benchmark.
Maybe test Unreal in SW mode can be little helpfull....

http://www.vgamuseum.info/index.php/benchmarks/311-unreal

Nice. Good to see that the Voodoo cards are up there.

Do not refrain from refusing to stop hindering yourself from the opposite of watching nothing other than that which is by no means porn.

Reply 13 of 21, by Stiletto

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
vlask wrote:
For VGA/Vesa can help you this mine little benchmark. […]
Show full quote

For VGA/Vesa can help you this mine little benchmark.

http://www.vgamuseum.info/index.php/benchmark … tware-rendering

Won't help you with directdraw, havent found good ddraw benchmark.
Maybe test Unreal in SW mode can be little helpfull....

http://www.vgamuseum.info/index.php/benchmarks/311-unreal

Hm, sometime I need to cross-reference this against Gona's compatibility list and try to get the fastest AND most compatible 😁

"I see a little silhouette-o of a man, Scaramouche, Scaramouche, will you
do the Fandango!" - Queen

Stiletto

Reply 15 of 21, by leileilol

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

I'm surprised there's a RTG3105iEH among the results.

apsosig.png
long live PCem

Reply 16 of 21, by RacoonRider

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

I have ISA Trident 9000i-3 512Kb, 8900D 1Mb and VLB CL GD5428. Never experienced any difference 😀

Reply 17 of 21, by swaaye

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

Hmmmm. I once upgraded from a ISA 8900C to a ISA GD5426 and it was dramatically faster. TIE Fighter SVGA became playable. It is SVGA that really displays the difference because of the higher bandwidth requirement. GD5426 is also one of the first budget GUI accelerator chips so there's also that speed benefit.

Another interesting experience I had was with a midrange Hercules Dynamite Power VLB (ET4000/W32p 2MB) vs. a high-end Number Nine Motion 771 VLB (S3 968 2MB VRAM). The 968 was a fast GUI chip but I couldn't tell the difference between it and the ET4000, and in DOS and Windows 95 games, the ET4000 was faster. I had Am5x86 160 at this time.

Reply 18 of 21, by valnar

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

I'd take a Voodoo variation if you don't need Windows 3.1 compatibility. It had great speed, VESA compatibility and 2D (signal) quality in DOS. 'Almost as good as a Matrox.

I could never get past the crappy ramdac on most of the early NVidia cards, like the RIVA 128.

Reply 19 of 21, by swaaye

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
valnar wrote:

I could never get past the crappy ramdac on most of the early NVidia cards, like the RIVA 128.

It's not the DAC. The quality of the analog circuitry varies between card makers.