First post, by AlessandroB
considering the success of the last post, and for the same reason, I now ask this question. Onboard there should be a 69000 ...
tnks
considering the success of the last post, and for the same reason, I now ask this question. Onboard there should be a 69000 ...
tnks
I must be some kind of standard: the anonymous gangbanger of the 21st century.
You should go all in and use an ISA graphics card.
That'll depend on what games
Assuming you mean a C&T 69000, and if it is it's 2MB?
Dos games should be fine
C&T 69000 is good for retrogaming?
2D windows games will also be fine, although the 2MB will limit what resolutions you can run
Basically if you want 16 bit High colour you can go as high as 800x600
If you drop down to 256 colour's you can get 1280x1024
3D accelerated games will be terrible though unless your including a adding a Voodoo1/2 for glide games.
chinny22 wrote on 2020-11-19, 10:54:That'll depend on what games Assuming you mean a C&T 69000, and if it is it's 2MB? […]
That'll depend on what games
Assuming you mean a C&T 69000, and if it is it's 2MB?Dos games should be fine
C&T 69000 is good for retrogaming?2D windows games will also be fine, although the 2MB will limit what resolutions you can run
Basically if you want 16 bit High colour you can go as high as 800x600
If you drop down to 256 colour's you can get 1280x10243D accelerated games will be terrible though unless your including a adding a Voodoo1/2 for glide games.
i know, but my other system with c&t graphich have less powerful cpu
Not sure why you mention the CPU? That's not going to change the resolution or 3D limitations.
The CPU will only make a difference if running games using software rendering (which is your only choice with this card anyway) but that's already a significant downgrade to using a proper 3D card.
Here's someone running a S3 Trio on a P3 600, also a card with very weak 3D performance. You can expect similar (but worse) results with yours.
https://youtu.be/2LGgo4wkyr8
That's what I meant, my other system with P233MMX obviously the power of the cpu would allow you to play 3D games ONLY in the presence of a 3D card. The question is whether a much more powerful cpu could make up for it, perhaps choosing lower resolutions.
and.... it is better to have a PIII 850Mhz without a 3D card or a Pentium200Mhz with PCI 3D card???
AlessandroB wrote on 2020-11-28, 09:46:and.... it is better to have a PIII 850Mhz without a 3D card or a Pentium200Mhz with PCI 3D card???
Apparently I missed the other thread - so no sure what exactly your trying to play. For Win9X gaming, most games from the Pentium 200mhz era didnt require a 3d card and have a software rendering option. I would think most games before year 2000 would play better on the PIII-850mhz + 2D until you hit the point were a GPU is required. Dos gaming might be easier on the P200 since you wouldnt have to worry about running too fast for things.
Check out DOSBox Distro:
https://sites.google.com/site/dosboxdistro/ [*]
a lightweight Linux distro (tinycore) which boots off a usb flash drive and goes straight to DOSBox.
Make your dos retrogaming experience portable!
BinaryDemon wrote on 2020-11-28, 11:50:AlessandroB wrote on 2020-11-28, 09:46:and.... it is better to have a PIII 850Mhz without a 3D card or a Pentium200Mhz with PCI 3D card???
Apparently I missed the other thread - so no sure what exactly your trying to play. For Win9X gaming, most games from the Pentium 200mhz era didnt require a 3d card and have a software rendering option. I would think most games before year 2000 would play better on the PIII-850mhz + 2D until you hit the point were a GPU is required. Dos gaming might be easier on the P200 since you wouldnt have to worry about running too fast for things.
ok tou hit the point. I don't have a specific game that I necessarily want to use with the P3 or the P200. Simply testing software and games (before 2000) I would not like to find that most games do not work even with a very powerful cpu like the P3. If trying the software a few very demanding games don't work is not a problem, the important thing is that the majority of 3D games work well in software render, even at low resolutions. For example I prefer quake1 in 320x200 because it reminds me more of the mode I played when it came out.
However if using the P200 + 3D card most of the time the games work better than in software mode with the P3, I will get a 3D PCI card. Moreover, the P200 only accepts 3D PCI cards and this must be taken into account.
AlessandroB wrote on 2020-11-28, 09:46:and.... it is better to have a PIII 850Mhz without a 3D card or a Pentium200Mhz with PCI 3D card???
if you would say PII 300 or PIII 800.. the PII would beat the shit out of the PIII in some, if not all Cases with a 3D Card installed.
https://www.retrokits.de - blog, retro projects, hdd clicker, diy soundcards etc
https://www.retroianer.de - german retro computer board
matze79 wrote on 2020-11-28, 13:57:AlessandroB wrote on 2020-11-28, 09:46:and.... it is better to have a PIII 850Mhz without a 3D card or a Pentium200Mhz with PCI 3D card???
if you would say PII 300 or PIII 800.. the PII would beat the shit out of the PIII in some, if not all Cases with a 3D Card installed.
But is not a PII300 but a P200(non MMX).
Id rather have the Pentium 1 with a 3D Rage or Voodoo or some such card than a P3 with just 2D. The Pentium 1 with 2D and lowend 3D has alot more usefulness than the P3. Although the P3 with a good 3D card or a C3 cpu and the 2D would be really handy
Main pc: Asus ROG 17. R9 5900HX, RTX 3070m, 16gb ddr4 3200, 1tb NVME.
Retro PC: Soyo P4S Dragon, 3gb ddr 266, 120gb Maxtor, Geforce Fx 5950 Ultra, SB Live! 5.1
yes, but I can't understand where the meeting point between P1 + 3D card and P3 + 2D card is. Unfortunately I don't have a voodoo2 and I can't compare them. I have only your advice to know what is best
for example, Screamer2 is fast on a P200+voodoo2 or P3 850?
chinny22 wrote on 2020-11-19, 10:54:Basically if you want 16 bit High colour you can go as high as 800x600
That resolution should be possible with only 1MB. Assuming the graphics chip can properly support 2MB, 1024x768 should be doable in 16-bit as well.
"Will the highways on the internets become more few?" -Gee Dubya
V'Ger XT|Upgraded AT|Ultimate 386|Super VL/EISA 486|SMP VL/EISA Pentium
Anonymous Coward wrote on 2020-11-29, 05:26:chinny22 wrote on 2020-11-19, 10:54:Basically if you want 16 bit High colour you can go as high as 800x600
That resolution should be possible with only 1MB. Assuming the graphics chip can properly support 2MB, 1024x768 should be doable in 16-bit as well.
it is not abiut resolution, tge lowest can be enough
I'm enjoying Rollercoaster Tycoon on a Trio at 1024x768x16 (2MB) while my replacement graphics card is shipped from Florida. Rendering is smooth in full screen. Windowed turns into a fast slideshow. I don't think it matters what the CPU is as long as it's fast enough (for this game, documentation suggests no benefit past P200).