Parni wrote on 2022-01-28, 19:08:

As I explainen earlier, I would like not to run DOS Glide (GTAFX.EXE) because then I cant use my Sidewinder gamepad, however according to the readme file it support also DirectX and I would like to run the Windows executable so that it detects my voodoo and run the game in directdraw mode and have both 3D acceleration and use my sidewinder gamepad.

I’m using the real deal equipment (233MMX,128mb,S3 Trio64+Voodoo1,SB16)

The only way you can get 3D Acceleration in the original GTA is using the special, DOS executable that makes use of 3Dfx Glide. There is no Direct3D version/executable/patch for GTA 1. The DOS installer presents you with three executables:

a) 8bit colour depth
b) 24bit colour depth
c) 3Dfx accelerated version

All of the above are strictly DOS, although you can run them through Windows no problem, usually. The Windows installer only has one executable if I recall correctly, using DirectDraw, which is completely separate from Direct3D, don't get these two mixed up. I believe it defaults to 24bit colour depth using the Windows executable, although it may just be 16bit, it certainly is a big upgrade over 8bit DOS.

I'm not entirely certain why supposedly your Sidewinder controller will not work with GTA 1. If there's some kind of driver you have to load under DOS that GTA 1 has an issue with, then setting the controller up under Windows and then running any of the DOS executables through Windows should probably alleviate any issues.

So just to drive the point, once again, the only way to play GTA with 3D Acceleration is by launching the DOS 3Dfx executable. That being said, I believe all it adds is bilinear texture filtering, though I may be wrong on this one. You will be just as CPU limited as well I think.

Lastly, I couldn't find which motherboard you are using, but chances are you are likely limited to a maximum cacheable RAM range of just 64MB due to the chipset, in which case you are likely experiencing lower than normal performance with 128MB. If you can, please tell us what chipset your motherboard has or which model motherboard you own and someone can find out the chipset and let you know.

Pierre32 wrote on 2022-01-28, 19:58:

Have you tried SDWRGMPD, the Sidewinder driver for DOS? http://www.bretjohnson.us/

Thanks!! I will give it a try 😀

Garrett W wrote on 2022-01-28, 21:34:

The only way you can get 3D Acceleration in the original GTA is using the special, DOS executable that makes use of 3Dfx Glide. […]
Show full quote

Parni wrote on 2022-01-28, 19:08:

As I explainen earlier, I would like not to run DOS Glide (GTAFX.EXE) because then I cant use my Sidewinder gamepad, however according to the readme file it support also DirectX and I would like to run the Windows executable so that it detects my voodoo and run the game in directdraw mode and have both 3D acceleration and use my sidewinder gamepad.

I’m using the real deal equipment (233MMX,128mb,S3 Trio64+Voodoo1,SB16)

The only way you can get 3D Acceleration in the original GTA is using the special, DOS executable that makes use of 3Dfx Glide. There is no Direct3D version/executable/patch for GTA 1. The DOS installer presents you with three executables:

a) 8bit colour depth
b) 24bit colour depth
c) 3Dfx accelerated version

All of the above are strictly DOS, although you can run them through Windows no problem, usually. The Windows installer only has one executable if I recall correctly, using DirectDraw, which is completely separate from Direct3D, don't get these two mixed up. I believe it defaults to 24bit colour depth using the Windows executable, although it may just be 16bit, it certainly is a big upgrade over 8bit DOS.

I'm not entirely certain why supposedly your Sidewinder controller will not work with GTA 1. If there's some kind of driver you have to load under DOS that GTA 1 has an issue with, then setting the controller up under Windows and then running any of the DOS executables through Windows should probably alleviate any issues.

So just to drive the point, once again, the only way to play GTA with 3D Acceleration is by launching the DOS 3Dfx executable. That being said, I believe all it adds is bilinear texture filtering, though I may be wrong on this one. You will be just as CPU limited as well I think.

Lastly, I couldn't find which motherboard you are using, but chances are you are likely limited to a maximum cacheable RAM range of just 64MB due to the chipset, in which case you are likely experiencing lower than normal performance with 128MB. If you can, please tell us what chipset your motherboard has or which model motherboard you own and someone can find out the chipset and let you know.

You are actually completely right, im mixing directdraw and direct3d, directdraw is a 2d component of directx (was a bit tired yesterday when posting). Im using a Asus TX97 MB with Intel 430tx chipset.

So summing everything up, my best chance to utilize sidewinder and have glide acceleration is to try the sidewinder dos drivers Pierre32 mentioned.

However I still have another problem with the DOS glide executable, for some reason it does not pick up the precense of IPX protocol (all other dos based games works with any problems). In practice I cant see the ”gather a network” when starting the game (this option works with the win executable). Does the glide version even have support for multiplayer at all?

The ultimate goal im looking for is to play the game in LAN with 3D acceleration and sidewinder gamepad 😀 that would be soooooooo cool 😀

Not going to comment on the multiplayer situation, just wanted to say that is a really nice board you have. However, it falls in the category I mentioned above, the 430TX chipset can only cache up to 64MB RAM. More RAM will work but it will be slower. I suggest removing some RAM to get better performance out of your system.

Parni wrote on 2022-01-29, 07:16:

So summing everything up, my best chance to utilize sidewinder and have glide acceleration is to try the sidewinder dos drivers Pierre32 mentioned.

However I still have another problem with the DOS glide executable, for some reason it does not pick up the precense of IPX protocol (all other dos based games works with any problems). In practice I cant see the ”gather a network” when starting the game (this option works with the win executable). Does the glide version even have support for multiplayer at all?

The ultimate goal im looking for is to play the game in LAN with 3D acceleration and sidewinder gamepad 😀 that would be soooooooo cool 😀

Does it have to be IPX or can you switch to TCP/IP? I'm using the latter on my DOS Glide box, but have never tried to network GTA. I might reinstall tonight and see what I see.

[edit] Well I'm none the wiser. According to this forum post it can be played over IPX or TCP/IP.

GTA 1 supported four communication methods: […]
Show full quote

GTA 1 supported four communication methods:

* Serial Link - this used a serial port, which was found on old PCs. DOS (I think) came with support for this.
* Modem - Using a modem with a phone line jack, you would connect your PC to another PC. One player would dial the other PC.

If players had a network card, the following protocols were supported:

* IPX/SPX - a now-outdated protocol common in the DOS and Windows 9x days
* TCP/IP - Used today to connect to the Internet (Windows version only)

Serial and modem support two players only. IPX/SPX and TCP/IP support two to four players.

When I go into Configure a Network Game I only see:

- Serial
- IPX
- Modem

Wonder if there's a patch I need.

Garrett W wrote on 2022-01-29, 08:52:

Not going to comment on the multiplayer situation, just wanted to say that is a really nice board you have. However, it falls in the category I mentioned above, the 430TX chipset can only cache up to 64MB RAM. More RAM will work but it will be slower. I suggest removing some RAM to get better performance out of your system.

What? Really? Why does it then in the first place support more than 64mb of RAM if it just makes the system slower?

Pierre32 wrote on 2022-01-29, 09:10:

Does it have to be IPX or can you switch to TCP/IP? I'm using the latter on my DOS Glide box, but have never tried to network GT […]
Show full quote

Parni wrote on 2022-01-29, 07:16:

So summing everything up, my best chance to utilize sidewinder and have glide acceleration is to try the sidewinder dos drivers Pierre32 mentioned.

However I still have another problem with the DOS glide executable, for some reason it does not pick up the precense of IPX protocol (all other dos based games works with any problems). In practice I cant see the ”gather a network” when starting the game (this option works with the win executable). Does the glide version even have support for multiplayer at all?

The ultimate goal im looking for is to play the game in LAN with 3D acceleration and sidewinder gamepad 😀 that would be soooooooo cool 😀

Does it have to be IPX or can you switch to TCP/IP? I'm using the latter on my DOS Glide box, but have never tried to network GTA. I might reinstall tonight and see what I see.

[edit] Well I'm none the wiser. According to this forum post it can be played over IPX or TCP/IP.

GTA 1 supported four communication methods: […]
Show full quote

GTA 1 supported four communication methods:

* Serial Link - this used a serial port, which was found on old PCs. DOS (I think) came with support for this.
* Modem - Using a modem with a phone line jack, you would connect your PC to another PC. One player would dial the other PC.

If players had a network card, the following protocols were supported:

* IPX/SPX - a now-outdated protocol common in the DOS and Windows 9x days
* TCP/IP - Used today to connect to the Internet (Windows version only)

Serial and modem support two players only. IPX/SPX and TCP/IP support two to four players.

When I go into Configure a Network Game I only see:

- Serial
- IPX
- Modem

Wonder if there's a patch I need.

Currently I just have an old 3com 8-port switch, but if the TCP/IP works I quess I could attach a router to the switch to get a DHCP running 😀 I think thats a minor task if I get the sidewinder and glide work simultaneously 😀

Parni wrote on 2022-01-29, 10:48:

Garrett W wrote on 2022-01-29, 08:52:

Not going to comment on the multiplayer situation, just wanted to say that is a really nice board you have. However, it falls in the category I mentioned above, the 430TX chipset can only cache up to 64MB RAM. More RAM will work but it will be slower. I suggest removing some RAM to get better performance out of your system.

What? Really? Why does it then in the first place support more than 64mb of RAM if it just makes the system slower?

Found this thread: Cache question

I need to test how significant the performance drop is.. I have also 64mb modules

Parni wrote on 2022-01-29, 10:48:

Garrett W wrote on 2022-01-29, 08:52:

Not going to comment on the multiplayer situation, just wanted to say that is a really nice board you have. However, it falls in the category I mentioned above, the 430TX chipset can only cache up to 64MB RAM. More RAM will work but it will be slower. I suggest removing some RAM to get better performance out of your system.

What? Really? Why does it then in the first place support more than 64mb of RAM if it just makes the system slower?

64MB in 1996-1997 was a really high amount. Most mainstream systems of the era came with 16MB and 32MB was considered high-end (although by late 1997 it became somewhat standard for new systems). For the applications and games you are likely to run on such a system and expect decent performance, 64MB is more than enough, especially with Win95 which has much lower requirements than Win98/98SE. However, there were some cases in which more RAM was beneficial, let's say you were using some kind of production software that ate it up. In that case, more RAM is better, as otherwise the system has to rely on virtual memory on the HDD and as such *chugs.

It's not really useful for videogames though, even demanding games from 1999 are fine with 64MB and consider that stated system requirements usually took into account the fact that you were running Windows with all sorts of other software running at boot-up and taking away precious resources. I wonder how many calendar birthday programs there were 🤣. This is why the option is there on those chipsets. Later chipsets from ALi and Via, designed around newer processors such as the K6-2 and K6-III, raise this limit higher, although you can still find some small performance dips going from 128MB to 256MB. Intel also offered a chipset, in the form of the 430HX, that could cache more than 64MB on socket 7. 430TX came out later, as the companion chipset to PMMX I believe, and was criticized at the time for this omission, but I suppose Intel didn't want it to cannibalize 430HX sales.

Garrett W wrote on 2022-01-29, 13:56:

Parni wrote on 2022-01-29, 10:48:

Garrett W wrote on 2022-01-29, 08:52:

Not going to comment on the multiplayer situation, just wanted to say that is a really nice board you have. However, it falls in the category I mentioned above, the 430TX chipset can only cache up to 64MB RAM. More RAM will work but it will be slower. I suggest removing some RAM to get better performance out of your system.

What? Really? Why does it then in the first place support more than 64mb of RAM if it just makes the system slower?

64MB in 1996-1997 was a really high amount. Most mainstream systems of the era came with 16MB and 32MB was considered high-end (although by late 1997 it became somewhat standard for new systems). For the applications and games you are likely to run on such a system and expect decent performance, 64MB is more than enough, especially with Win95 which has much lower requirements than Win98/98SE. However, there were some cases in which more RAM was beneficial, let's say you were using some kind of production software that ate it up. In that case, more RAM is better, as otherwise the system has to rely on virtual memory on the HDD and as such *chugs.

It's not really useful for videogames though, even demanding games from 1999 are fine with 64MB and consider that stated system requirements usually took into account the fact that you were running Windows with all sorts of other software running at boot-up and taking away precious resources. I wonder how many calendar birthday programs there were 🤣. This is why the option is there on those chipsets. Later chipsets from ALi and Via, designed around newer processors such as the K6-2 and K6-III, raise this limit higher, although you can still find some small performance dips going from 128MB to 256MB. Intel also offered a chipset, in the form of the 430HX, that could cache more than 64MB on socket 7. 430TX came out later, as the companion chipset to PMMX I believe, and was criticized at the time for this omission, but I suppose Intel didn't want it to cannibalize 430HX sales.

I know 128mb is a bit overkill 😀 but I happened to have various modules and thought to go overkill but didnt realize it could have a negative impact, I will run Final reality and see how much is the performance difference with 64mb

Also trying to make GTA1 from Classic edition working on Windows98Se and my Voodoo2.

It's windows-only installer.
Readme states Windows98SE and Support of 3DFx.

So there should be a way to make it work without using DOS version.

Added full readme

This again? It has already been posted in the previous page.

There is no 3Dfx accelerated version of GTA for Windows. The 3Dfx executable is a DOS application.

I never saw a 3D accelerated version of GTA for Windows and as mentioned before, not every Windows games using DirectX necessarily uses Direct3D.

Apparently there are people that don't bother reading the entire thread prior posting. 😜

Gmlb256 wrote on 2022-06-09, 15:07:

I never saw a 3D accelerated version of GTA for Windows and as mentioned before, not every Windows games using DirectX necessarily uses Direct3D.

Apparently there are people that don't bother reading the entire thread prior posting. 😜

I read the post and even others.... but there's actually nothing to explain why this version of the game which is a WINDOWS version only is explicitly talking about 3DFX acceleration.... and posted the whole readme file as it was not done before.

NyLan wrote on 2022-06-11, 16:44:

Gmlb256 wrote on 2022-06-09, 15:07:

I never saw a 3D accelerated version of GTA for Windows and as mentioned before, not every Windows games using DirectX necessarily uses Direct3D.

Apparently there are people that don't bother reading the entire thread prior posting. 😜

I read the post and even others.... but there's actually nothing to explain why this version of the game which is a WINDOWS version only is explicitly talking about 3DFX acceleration.... and posted the whole readme file as it was not done before.
DgOUZdKWsAEKCo7.jpg

I think the readme file is just a carry over from the original release - no one bothered to update/remove it from the compilation.

Meatball wrote on 2022-06-11, 18:10:

NyLan wrote on 2022-06-11, 16:44:

Gmlb256 wrote on 2022-06-09, 15:07:

I never saw a 3D accelerated version of GTA for Windows and as mentioned before, not every Windows games using DirectX necessarily uses Direct3D.

Apparently there are people that don't bother reading the entire thread prior posting. 😜

I read the post and even others.... but there's actually nothing to explain why this version of the game which is a WINDOWS version only is explicitly talking about 3DFX acceleration.... and posted the whole readme file as it was not done before.
DgOUZdKWsAEKCo7.jpg

I think the readme file is just a carry over from the original release - no one bothered to update/remove it from the compilation.

I assume that it was the free download from Rockstar Classics website which isn't available anymore. The README file NyLan posted is from 2004 and the ones I could find dates from 2002 but it doesn't mention 3Dfx at all.

Gmlb256 wrote on 2022-06-11, 18:45:

Meatball wrote on 2022-06-11, 18:10:

NyLan wrote on 2022-06-11, 16:44:

I read the post and even others.... but there's actually nothing to explain why this version of the game which is a WINDOWS version only is explicitly talking about 3DFX acceleration.... and posted the whole readme file as it was not done before.
DgOUZdKWsAEKCo7.jpg

I think the readme file is just a carry over from the original release - no one bothered to update/remove it from the compilation.

I assume that it was the free download from Rockstar Classics website which isn't available anymore. The README file NyLan posted is from 2004 and the ones I could find dates from 2002 but it doesn't mention 3Dfx at all.

If you look on the 1st page of this thread, I posted photos of the retail version from 2004, which I own. I double checked, and it has the readme file mentioning 3dfx at the root of the CD, but 3dfx is not mentioned anywhere on the outside of the box. Why would it, of course? Given that 3dfx was long dead when this was released and it was meant for a voodoo1, I'm pretty confident it was simply lack of effort to tidy the file up.

Meatball wrote on 2022-06-11, 20:51:

Gmlb256 wrote on 2022-06-11, 18:45:

Meatball wrote on 2022-06-11, 18:10:

I think the readme file is just a carry over from the original release - no one bothered to update/remove it from the compilation.

I assume that it was the free download from Rockstar Classics website which isn't available anymore. The README file NyLan posted is from 2004 and the ones I could find dates from 2002 but it doesn't mention 3Dfx at all.

If you look on the 1st page of this thread, I posted photos of the retail version from 2004, which I own. I double checked, and it has the readme file mentioning 3dfx at the root of the CD. Given that 3dfx was long dead when this was released and it was meant for a voodoo1, I'm pretty confident it was simply lack of effort to tidy the file up.

Yep, it doesn't make sense to release a commercial game with an executable using the Glide API for Windows in 2004.

The Readme file is clearly from 2004. It's very short and clearly states on 1st line :

This version of GTA is modified from its original version to enable support for modern PC's
and current Microsoft Windows(R) platforms.