IS-DUBIC or IS-TITAN means it's a Matrox Impression. That one already has some rudimentary 3D (no texturing, just Gouraud shaded triangles). It is probably not that interesting for DOS.
An ET4000/W32 is usually a good choice, although it might run slower if it isn't equipped with enough RAM. Is there an update socket on your mainboard for more VRAM?
Could you do any benchmarks so we can see if it really runs slow? You could start from here: Phil's Ultimate VGA Benchmark Database Project

If you want to get a better card anyway ET4000 and later Paradise cards should be good choices.

I still looking for an ISA graphic card which provide better performance than my tseng labs ET4000/W32 with 1 mo ram, integrated in my 486 motherboard.

If you ask me, then you already have the best one. It is fast in DOS and also fast as a Windows 3.1/9X accelerator. For Windows it would be even faster if you had 2MB and your ET4000/w32 supports memory interleaving, but for DOS there isn't any difference in speed.

Stojke had some benchmarks showing the WDC 90C31 being faster then ET4000AX in DOS, but I couldn't repeat his results.

I wouldn't look for a replacement. Only if there are some special requirements that you are after.

I already did some vga benches on a matrox impression lite and the dos performance was abysmal.
However the card is still quite interesting because of the basic 3D acceleration within Windows.

Yeah, you're probably gonna be fine with the integrated ET4000/W32, depending on if you can upgrade the VRAM or not.

elianda wrote:

I already did some vga benches on a matrox impression lite and the dos performance was abysmal.

Indeed, according to http://www.vgamuseum.info/index.php/benchmarks a PCI Impression Plus is slower than a Rendition card in its "slow" modes, but unlike Rendition it is doesn't have any faster modes (ie. it is slower than most ISA cards). I don't know if it is faster in Windows.

ISA cards will be slower then PCI cards just because of the slow BUS speeds.

Are you sure the Et4000 isn't an early AX model? Quite a few of the ISA Tsengs are the 4000AX variety. The W32 models are faster in Windows, and faster yet if they were the 2MB ones.

Anything pre Matrox Millenium doesn't have much support unless you are just looking for high color and resolution Win3 work.

Dunkill wrote:

I still looking for an ISA graphic card which provide better performance than my tseng labs ET4000/W32 with 1 mo ram, integrated in my 486 motherboard.

That integrated card might run on a VLB bus and no isa card will compete with that, regardless I don't believe any isa card will be faster for what you want to do anyway, short answer? Relax you've already got the best solution for what your board can do 😀.

You could run some benchmarks with 3dmark/PCPbench/Doom and we'll be able to give you an idea if its running faster than a typical isa card.

Thanks to everyone for replies.
I understand now that i have a great chipset for dos games, I see in wikipedia that ET4000w/32 can allow 2 mo ram.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tseng_Labs_ET4000

But in my motherboard i only have 1mo and no empty socket to put extra ram chip 😒
I'm a little frustrated to see some lags in high graphics mode in Doom and frontier elite 2 ...

So someone here know how i can upgrade to 2 mo ram ?

Dunkill wrote:

But in my motherboard i only have 1mo and no empty socket to put extra ram chip 😒
I'm a little frustrated to see some lags in high graphics mode in Doom and frontier elite 2 ...

So someone here know how i can upgrade to 2 mo ram ?

Your graphics card wont impact performance for games, you'll have to upgrade your CPU for that and adding extra memory wont help gaming but it will allow for 1024X768 16 bit colour in windows.

What CPU do you have at the moment?

And you don't have VLB slots?

The question for your is whether you want higher resolution in windows with 16 bit colour otherwise it pointless to upgrade your video card

I have a 486 dx2 66 Mhz Cpu with 32 Mo ram.
In my mind it's enough to run doom properly, so if i have lags i thought the problem come from my graphic card.
I don't have VBL port, only ISA on this 486 pc

Run Phil's benchmarks suit so we can assess your PC performance:
Phil's Ultimate VGA Benchmark Database Project

Also NSSI will tell you what BUS the graphic card uses:
http://www.navsoft.cz/products.htm

This is how a report for graphic card looks like:

-

Dunkill wrote:

I have a 486 dx2 66 Mhz Cpu with 32 Mo ram.
In my mind it's enough to run doom properly, so if i have lags i thought the problem come from my graphic card.

I used to play Doom on a PC with that CPU, 8MB RAM and a Cirrus Logic CL-GD5424 with 512KB built into the motherboard but connected with a VLB bus, and it ran just fine. I'm pretty sure your current video card is better. Are you running Doom on DOS or Windows?

I made some tests :

In fact in the motherboard the cpu is a 486 sx 25. But there is a socket to plug a co-processor, I put a 486 dx2 66 on it. The best the motherboard can accept.
But here navratil display that my co-pro is fewer powerfull than a 486 66 mhz, and i don't understand it.

But i tried to run quake and it's lagging like hell, i think it's normal 🤣

PCPBENCH in VGA mode : 10.8 fps
BENCHMARK : 43.4 fps

How can i display the fps when I'm playing to Doom ?

I wouldn't expect a 486/66 to run quake well. You need a 486/100 to barely play it

Quake is heavily optimized for a Pentium and fast FPU. Try running Doom on it and see what kind of results you get, that is a game that runs just fine on a 66 486.

If there is a possibility of selecting 40MHz BUS speed, then this processor will run at 80MHz. Also check the BIOS advanced settings - DRAM/cache timings, ISA bus divider. This settings can have a great impact on performance, but can lead to instabilities if the motherboard can't take it. But since the VGA runs on ISA bus, these are quite good benchmarks.

Download benchmark suit if you haven't yet, there you have DOOM benchmark and the result is in "ticks", like 2345. This converts to FPS by a formula: FPS = realtics/gametics * 35
https://www.mediafire.com/?4riihr1m9iui13v

Ah! So the built-in video card is using a ISA bus. That explains why it's so slow in Doom. I never tried it on a 486 with ISA video card, but at least with a VLB card it runs very well (in DOS).

As for the CPU performance not matching a 486DX2-66 in that benchmark it could be for any number of reason. Slower RAM, no Cache, slower motherboard chipset, etc. Quake doesn't even run well in a 5x86 133MHz so that's expected. You really need a Pentium for that one, but Doom should run well provided the video card isn't slowing things down.

My personal preference in ISA is ATi Mach64. It's one of the last cards made in ISA and comes with 2 or 4 mb of memory so you can use resolutions and color depths that cards with less memory can't. They aren't cheap, though.