Having 8 MB of texture memory means less texture swapping than with only 4 MB. That's it. If a game uses lots of textures, performance with a 12 MB card is (or can be) better.

derSammler wrote:

Having 8 MB of texture memory means less texture swapping than with only 4 MB. That's it. If a game uses lots of textures, performance with a 12 MB card is (or can be) better.

Uh huh, cool, and a game that does this and the effect can be visible is...?

The Glide API should do that, not the games. I only own 8 MB Voodo 2 cards, so no idea if there are any games where you can actually notice a difference.

derSammler wrote:

The Glide API should do that, not the games. I only own 8 MB Voodo 2 cards, so no idea if there are any games where you can actually notice a difference.

Ok, the Glide API, or the magic little elves inside the computer 🤣 don’t really care who, just interested in where the difference (if any) can be seen 😊

Voodoo 2 memory size is tricky, because everything is separated to different chips. Voodoo 2 8mb has only 2mb for each texture mapping unit, which isn't any better than Voodoo I.

Uh huh, cool, and a game that does this and the effect can be visible is...

Quake 3 is horrible on Voodoo 2 for example. Some big UT maps might not like it too.

The Serpent Rider wrote:

Voodoo 2 memory size is tricky, because everything is separated to different chips. Voodoo 2 8mb has only 2mb for each texture mapping unit, which isn't any better than Voodoo I.

Uh huh, cool, and a game that does this and the effect can be visible is...

Quake 3 is horrible on Voodoo 2 for example. Some big UT maps might not like it too.

Ok, but you’re talking about Voodoo 2 in general there. Doesn’t really answer the 8 vs 12 MB issue 😐

Since you have cards with 8 MB and 12 MB, just try some games yourself. Let us know if you find games where a difference is noticeable.

derSammler wrote:

Since you have cards with 8 MB and 12 MB, just try some games yourself. Let us know if you find games where a difference is noticeable.

Right... so basically your answer to a question is telling the person that asks to answer it themselves...

I think in my mind I will just replace all the text you wrote with “I don’t know”....

A game where I think you would notice the difference would be 'Unreal'.

This could be a good video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lmmSBFVeF3I
only compares 4 MB, 6 MB and 8 MB though. But might be similar 8 MB vs 12 MB on 800x600 high detail settings.

I have both cards might put it to the test.

For example Q3A high details 640x480:

V2 8 MB = 21 fps
V2 12 MB = 38 fps

http://hw-museum.cz/article/2/benchmark-vga-1 … 2011-edition-/7

Basically what is true today was true back then: Less texture memory means you will have to tone down texture quality or suffer a framerate hit as games start to have higher quality textures. If you got a 4GB card two years ago it was probably a wash for a year or so but today you are probably regretting it. If you bought an 8MB Voodoo 2 in 1998 you probably had no problems in 1999 but you regretted it in 2000 (Believe me, I know. I had an 8MB Voodoo 2 in 1998 and upgraded to a Voodoo 3 in 2000. I would probably have held off if I had the 12MB version.. Needless to say I bought an 8GB RX480 2 years ago and can still use it today..)

Probably anything more demanding than Quake II you will see a difference in speed. The FPS might only lower slightly but you will experience tiny hiccups during gameplay.
You can off course lower the texture resolution in many games to get closer to the 2MB texture memory of the 8MB card.

This article mentions Half-Life: https://www.gamespot.com/articles/voodoo2s-ga … nd/1100-2462880

walterg74 wrote:

- 8MB cards have 4MB Frame Buffer and 4MB Texture Memory
- 12MB cards have the same 4MB Frame Buffer and 8MB Texture Memory

Nope, an 8MB card has 2x2MB texture memory and 12MB card has 2x4MB texture memory, on a per TMU-based. Games not taking advantages of multi-texturing lose out and do not use the memory from the 2nd TMU. 3Dfx had an architecture that was skim on texture details with only 16-bit texture and max size at 256x256 for this generation of hardware. Texture heavy games that preload tons of textures are performance pitfall for 3Dfx and would fair better with i740 AGP, TNT or even G200/G400.

A 8MB Voodoo II would have worse performance than a 6MB Voodoo1 for games that use tons of textures and do not support multi-texturing, if not for its increased clock speed. Texture thrashing will kill the performance. Direct3D did not have multi-texturing until DirectX 6.1 and Direct3D game titles were picking up the stream after Microsoft improved the APIs in DirectX 5. Those were the critics for 8MB Voodoo II back then. The improved resolutions of 800x600 and 1024x768 SLI do not make sense if local texture storage remains the same as Voodoo1.

appiah4 wrote:

Basically what is true today was true back then: Less texture memory means you will have to tone down texture quality or suffer a framerate hit as games start to have higher quality textures. If you got a 4GB card two years ago it was probably a wash for a year or so but today you are probably regretting it. If you bought an 8MB Voodoo 2 in 1998 you probably had no problems in 1999 but you regretted it in 2000 (Believe me, I know. I had an 8MB Voodoo 2 in 1998 and upgraded to a Voodoo 3 in 2000. I would probably have held off if I had the 12MB version.. Needless to say I bought an 8GB RX480 2 years ago and can still use it today..)

Hmm ok, but I guess you also have to consider that the hardware is not the only one available forever anyway, right? I mean, how many of those later games would actually run fine on a PII and not struggle, in a way that I would rather then run in a PIII which I would pair with a Voodoo 3?

kjliew wrote:

walterg74 wrote:

- 8MB cards have 4MB Frame Buffer and 4MB Texture Memory
- 12MB cards have the same 4MB Frame Buffer and 8MB Texture Memory

Nope, an 8MB card has 2x2MB texture memory and 12MB card has 2x4MB texture memory, on a per TMU-based. Games not taking advantages of multi-texturing lose out and do not use the memory from the 2nd TMU. 3Dfx had an architecture that was skim on texture details with only 16-bit texture and max size at 256x256 for this generation of hardware. Texture heavy games that preload tons of textures are performance pitfall for 3Dfx and would fair better with i740 AGP, TNT or even G200/G400.

A 8MB Voodoo II would have worse performance than a 6MB Voodoo1 for games that use tons of textures and do not support multi-texturing, if not for its increased clock speed. Texture thrashing will kill the performance. Direct3D did not have multi-texturing until DirectX 6.1 and Direct3D game titles were picking up the stream after Microsoft improved the APIs in DirectX 5. Those were the critics for 8MB Voodoo II back then. The improved resolutions of 800x600 and 1024x768 SLI do not make sense if local texture storage remains the same as Voodoo1.

Right, I just summed up the total memory, I know there are 2 TMUs on each (so it’s not “nope”, it’s “yes, but split into 2 units”...)

Are you sure Bout the Voodoo 1?

- Arent’ the TMU accessed in parallel anyway?
- Isn’t the Voodoo 1 completely overshadowed in processing power anyway by the Voodoo II, regardless of textures..?
- Voodoo 1 doesn’t even go beyond 640x480 as well

The RAM connected to each TMU contains identical data. A TMU can not access the others RAM so both need all the data for the frame.

So it is correct to say the 8MB Voodoo 2 has 2MB texture memory even though it has 4MB RAM dedicated for that purpose.

lost77 wrote:

The RAM connected to each TMU contains identical data. A TMU can not access the others RAM so both need all the data for the frame.

So it is correct to say the 8MB Voodoo 2 has 2MB texture memory even though it has 4MB RAM dedicated for that purpose.

That doesn’t sound right at all.. I think you are confusing the data on one card with the data on two cards in SLI.

walterg74 wrote:

- Arent’ the TMU accessed in parallel anyway?
- Isn’t the Voodoo 1 completely overshadowed in processing power anyway by the Voodoo II, regardless of textures..?
- Voodoo 1 doesn’t even go beyond 640x480 as well

There were test cases that could show Canopus3D 6MB Voodoo1 outperformed 8MB Diamond Monster3D II at the same 640x480 resolution. They were test cases though, but it is not hard to comprehend how to hit hard on 8MB Voodoo2 but not 6MB Voodoo1 -- texture thrashing. Final Reality (DirectX 5 D3D ) has a texturing test, perhaps to showcase the advantage of AGP texturing. When the texture size exceeds Voodoo1/2 per-TMU memory, the test just crawls.

Alright, real world scenario ... 😎 Activision Heavy Gear 1 with 1.2 beta patch improved the game visual quality with additional textures and support 16-bit texture quality. It absolutely required at least 4MB of texture storage. It does not support any higher resolution than 640x480. The game still work on Voodoo1 6MB but not on 8MB Voodoo2. Unlike most 2D/3D combo cards which all have unified memory, Voodoo1/2 memory architecture is discrete. The memory used for framebuffer can only be framebuffer or offscreen buffers, but not texture storage.

Anyway, if you have a collection of games run fine on 4MB Voodoo1, they will continue to work well with performance upgrade. That was perhaps the business side of argument for launching 8MB Voodoo2 cards.

kjliew wrote:

There were test cases that could show Canopus3D 6MB Voodoo1 outperformed 8MB Diamond Monster3D II at the same 640x480 resolution […]
Show full quote

walterg74 wrote:

- Arent’ the TMU accessed in parallel anyway?
- Isn’t the Voodoo 1 completely overshadowed in processing power anyway by the Voodoo II, regardless of textures..?
- Voodoo 1 doesn’t even go beyond 640x480 as well

There were test cases that could show Canopus3D 6MB Voodoo1 outperformed 8MB Diamond Monster3D II at the same 640x480 resolution. They were test cases though, but it is not hard to comprehend how to hit hard on 8MB Voodoo2 but not 6MB Voodoo1 -- texture thrashing. Final Reality (DirectX 5 D3D ) has a texturing test, perhaps to showcase the advantage of AGP texturing. When the texture size exceeds Voodoo1/2 per-TMU memory, the test just crawls.

Alright, real world scenario ... 😎 Activision Heavy Gear 1 with 1.2 beta patch improved the game visual quality with additional textures and support 16-bit texture quality. It absolutely required at least 4MB of texture storage. It does not support any higher resolution than 640x480. The game still work on Voodoo1 6MB but not on 8MB Voodoo2. Unlike most 2D/3D combo cards which all have unified memory, Voodoo1/2 memory architecture is discrete. The memory used for framebuffer can only be framebuffer or offscreen buffers, but not texture storage.

Anyway, if you have a collection of games run fine on 4MB Voodoo1, they will continue to work well with performance upgrade. That was perhaps the business side of argument for launching 8MB Voodoo2 cards.

That’s interesting, although would have to see if it’s worth it for kust one game or if there are others also.

Regarding the “works in 6MB V1 but not on 8MB V2”, why is that? Don’t both have 4MB texture memory..? 😲