sliderider wrote:

An original Voodoo Graphics or Voodoo Rush is probably going to be the best for a 1997 period PC. The original Voodoo pretty much set the bar for speed and quality at that time. Voodoo Graphics has the advantage of being faster, but requires a separate 2D Card and pass through cable while the Rush is an all in one card with an Alliance 2D chip on board that requires only one slot, but is slower than Voodoo Graphics with a dedicated 2D card. There is a late model Hercules Rush that adds a little more RAM and bumps the clocks slightly to make up some of the speed loss, but it's probably not worth looking for one unless money is no object because they don't usually go cheap.

Oh, and watch out for a Voodoo Rush with a Macronix 2D chip (it has a big MX written on top). They are rarer than the ones with the Alliance 2D chip but the 2D performance is supposed to be worse, so for a machine you intend to use a lot I'd try to find one with an Alliance 2D chip.

This is the first time I've heard someone recommending a Voodoo Rush. I understood they were quite terrible.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3dfx_Interactive#Voodoo_Rush

Are you striving for "period correctness" to the point where you are willing to put up with major inconvenience, Mr. Hexace? Or are you just looking for a machine that is capable of running 1997-era games without compatibility problems?

To be honest a lot of the games I played back then (and want to now!) were '2D' (Age of Empires, Twinsens Odyssey, GTA). Iirc they ran smoothly on a 2MB S3.

One one hand, the Rush is a novel card, but if there's going to be serious incompatibilities I'm quite happy to go a Voodoo1 +2D S3 or the weaker nVidia/ATi/S3 options. Did the Rush get better as drivers progressed?

Jorpho wrote:

This is the first time I've heard someone recommending a Voodoo Rush. I understood they were quite terrible. http://en.wikipedi […]
Show full quote

sliderider wrote:

An original Voodoo Graphics or Voodoo Rush is probably going to be the best for a 1997 period PC. The original Voodoo pretty much set the bar for speed and quality at that time. Voodoo Graphics has the advantage of being faster, but requires a separate 2D Card and pass through cable while the Rush is an all in one card with an Alliance 2D chip on board that requires only one slot, but is slower than Voodoo Graphics with a dedicated 2D card. There is a late model Hercules Rush that adds a little more RAM and bumps the clocks slightly to make up some of the speed loss, but it's probably not worth looking for one unless money is no object because they don't usually go cheap.

Oh, and watch out for a Voodoo Rush with a Macronix 2D chip (it has a big MX written on top). They are rarer than the ones with the Alliance 2D chip but the 2D performance is supposed to be worse, so for a machine you intend to use a lot I'd try to find one with an Alliance 2D chip.

This is the first time I've heard someone recommending a Voodoo Rush. I understood they were quite terrible.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3dfx_Interactive#Voodoo_Rush

Are you striving for "period correctness" to the point where you are willing to put up with major inconvenience, Mr. Hexace? Or are you just looking for a machine that is capable of running 1997-era games without compatibility problems?

The Voodoo Rush uses an identical chipset to the original Voodoo Graphics. The Rush is a bit slower than Voodoo Graphics in 3D because there is some overhead involved in having the 2D chip on the same card, but the performance hit is not enormous. The Alliance 2D is middle of the road as far as Windows accelerators go, but on some motherboards that only have 3 PCI slots, it's a sacrifice some are willing to make to save a slot for something else as, ideally, you would have wanted to pair a Voodoo Graphics with one of the more recent PCI 2D cards like a Tseng ET6000/6100 that were capable of better image quality, higher resolutions, greater color depths and faster Windows acceleration than most ISA cards released up to that time. As mentioned earlier, the later Hercules Stingray 128/3D cards alleviate the bottlenecks somewhat. Looking at the rest of the competition from 1997 and earlier, the Rush isn't a bad card compared to say, a Rendition Verite, S3 Virge, or the early Rage's.

We are also talking about a period correct 1997 machine here, and the Rush was one of the cards released in 1997 so you can't go without mentioning it.

Hexace wrote:

Thanks for the advice! :happyhappy: I've made the upgrade to 64MB and in the process discovered...that I actually have an IBM/C […]
Show full quote

Thanks for the advice! 😁 I've made the upgrade to 64MB and in the process discovered...that I actually have an IBM/Cyrix 6x86MX PR233 running 3.0x66-200MHz. I suppose this sweetens it a little. I'm quite keen on the Cyrix as I have literally dozens of Intel/AMD CPU's but only a single Cyrix. Given the state of today's games, it's funny to think that they were once CPU limited.

I think the Voodoo1 & Rush interest me most at this stage - I have plans to resurrect a 1998 P2 400 soon, which by the sound of it would better suit a Voodoo2 or V2 SLI?
How much of a premium should I be expecting to pay for 1/Rush? I'm seeing all the way to triple digits for some 3DFX cards on eBay!

Funnily enough, this turned up on eBay AU overnight. Not 100% sure what it is?
http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Diamond-3DFX-Add-c … =item1c1ca58d5c

Thanks Again

I don't know about the costs of a Rush. Iirc I don't even have one. The oldest Voodoo all-in-one card I have is a Banshee, which is basically a Rush based on a single Voodoo 2 chip (V2's had 2 such chips).
Personally I'd go with a V1 and the S3. S3 was reasonably good with 2D and supposedly had relatively little compatibility problems (meaning you'll spend less hours trying to make games work 😀 ).
You could use the 3rd PCI slot for a NIC or something and stick with ISA sound.

Personally I have a soft spot for Cyrix. They had a horrible name during the P1/P2 age for being slow for gaming and running very hot compared to other CPU's of the time. I'd highly suggest you to not overclock your chip, partly because they are already running at their limits and also because you only have a single one 😉

The 2.9v Cyrix chips are not rare though.
If you're interested in buying a couple more for not insane prices (or are looking for other chips perhaps), I'd recommend you take a look here: http://www.cpu-world.com/forum/

Do you happen to know the exact markings of your chip?
The PR233 ran at either 188Mhz or even 200Mhz, depending on their rated FSB.

Tetrium wrote:

I don't know about the costs of a Rush. Iirc I don't even have one. The oldest Voodoo all-in-one card I have is a Banshee, which […]
Show full quote

Hexace wrote:

Thanks for the advice! :happyhappy: I've made the upgrade to 64MB and in the process discovered...that I actually have an IBM/C […]
Show full quote

Thanks for the advice! 😁 I've made the upgrade to 64MB and in the process discovered...that I actually have an IBM/Cyrix 6x86MX PR233 running 3.0x66-200MHz. I suppose this sweetens it a little. I'm quite keen on the Cyrix as I have literally dozens of Intel/AMD CPU's but only a single Cyrix. Given the state of today's games, it's funny to think that they were once CPU limited.

I think the Voodoo1 & Rush interest me most at this stage - I have plans to resurrect a 1998 P2 400 soon, which by the sound of it would better suit a Voodoo2 or V2 SLI?
How much of a premium should I be expecting to pay for 1/Rush? I'm seeing all the way to triple digits for some 3DFX cards on eBay!

Funnily enough, this turned up on eBay AU overnight. Not 100% sure what it is?
http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Diamond-3DFX-Add-c … =item1c1ca58d5c

Thanks Again

I don't know about the costs of a Rush. Iirc I don't even have one. The oldest Voodoo all-in-one card I have is a Banshee, which is basically a Rush based on a single Voodoo 2 chip (V2's had 2 such chips).
Personally I'd go with a V1 and the S3. S3 was reasonably good with 2D and supposedly had relatively little compatibility problems (meaning you'll spend less hours trying to make games work 😀 ).
You could use the 3rd PCI slot for a NIC or something and stick with ISA sound.

Personally I have a soft spot for Cyrix. They had a horrible name during the P1/P2 age for being slow for gaming and running very hot compared to other CPU's of the time. I'd highly suggest you to not overclock your chip, partly because they are already running at their limits and also because you only have a single one 😉

The 2.9v Cyrix chips are not rare though.
If you're interested in buying a couple more for not insane prices (or are looking for other chips perhaps), I'd recommend you take a look here: http://www.cpu-world.com/forum/

Do you happen to know the exact markings of your chip?
The PR233 ran at either 188Mhz or even 200Mhz, depending on their rated FSB.

It's not quite the same in execution as a Rush. With a Rush, you have separate 2D and 3D chips on the card that have to talk to each other to a certain extent creating overhead. With a Banshee, you're missing one V2 TMU, but the 2D and 3D are integrated so there's not really any overhead to speak of, while the Rush has a fully functional Voodoo Graphics on board with nothing removed or deactivated.

bushwack wrote:

The nVidia Riva 128 was a good performer in 97' if you could find a card with that chip. Fast in DOS too.

How about a Riva with a Voodoo 1? 😁

sliderider wrote:

We are also talking about a period correct 1997 machine here, and the Rush was one of the cards released in 1997 so you can't go without mentioning it.

Hence my question: who, exactly, is talking about this utter madness about being "period correct" ?

So what if a Voodoo2 is overkill for the system in question? It is easily obtained and will provide good compatibility for the majority of Glide games one is likely to play. It's not like all the problems with nVidia cards these days where support for older features is being dropped from the hardware and the drivers; in a case like that I can understand sacrificing performance. But "it wasn't released in 1997 so it's no good" is just baffling.

A bit offtopic, but I personally build a system around a motherboard/CPU combo and pick my parts to match. The matching parts can also mean a mid-range newer card or a top-notch older card, whatever fits the bill.

Jorpho wrote:

sliderider wrote:

We are also talking about a period correct 1997 machine here, and the Rush was one of the cards released in 1997 so you can't go without mentioning it.

Hence my question: who, exactly, is talking about this utter madness about being "period correct" ?

So what if a Voodoo2 is overkill for the system in question? It is easily obtained and will provide good compatibility for the majority of Glide games one is likely to play. It's not like all the problems with nVidia cards these days where support for older features is being dropped from the hardware and the drivers; in a case like that I can understand sacrificing performance. But "it wasn't released in 1997 so it's no good" is just baffling.

Your reading comprehension is somewhat lacking. The original poster said quite clearly in the first post that he was aiming for a 1997 vintage machine, which would exclude the Voodoo 2 which wasn't released until 1998.

Hexace wrote:

On my current project I'm aiming for a 1997 gaming/mid-range machine.

I don't think the "life is too short, don't bother with old crap and use xp" solution is very compatible with the retro PC hobbyist section of this board.

Tetrium wrote:

A bit offtopic, but I personally build a system around a motherboard/CPU combo and pick my parts to match. The matching parts can also mean a mid-range newer card or a top-notch older card, whatever fits the bill.

That's my philosophy as well, but if someone else mentions they want to be period correct to a specific year, I'm not going to advise them to use anything other than what was available during the year in question or earlier and in this specific case the Voodoo 2 falls just outside of being correct for 1997. I have a pair in SLi myself, but if I was going to build a machine that was correct to any year prior to 1998, I wouldn't use them. I don't do period correct builds, though.

sliderider wrote:

Your reading comprehension is somewhat lacking. The original poster said quite clearly in the first post that he was aiming for a 1997 vintage machine, which would exclude the Voodoo 2 which wasn't released until 1998.

Hexace wrote:

On my current project I'm aiming for a 1997 gaming/mid-range machine.

And why exactly does "a 1997 gaming/mid-range machine" mean "a machine that does not contain any parts newer than 1997" ? "A machine that plays games from around 1997" seems like an equally valid but also much more reasonable interpretation, especially considering that it can indeed be difficult to get games from that time working on current hardware.

Because really, what else are you going to do with a machine that does not contain any parts newer than 1997? If that's the only critereon you might as well fill it right up with any semi-random parts, and to heck with performance. Hence my question to Mr. Hexace.

Hexace wrote:

Maybe 1998 cards if there's a significant jump.

I don't think being off by 1 year matters that much 😜
It's not like he's trying to put a GF5200FX PCI + SB Audigy in there 😜

And S3 Trio was old by then, right?

Sometimes, you just want to build something to transport you back to a certain year or time period. I'm fixated with the 95-01 period as I like to imagine what I would have built back then had I had the money/ know-how. So, if the OP insists on maintaining a 1997 only machine, it's not an unreasonable thing.

Personally though, anything within a 3 year period should be considered "period correct" as that's usually the lifespan of a platform from launch to replacement, though sometimes there are exceptions to this, but I digress. so....E.g. a 450mhz PIII slot 1 BX system with a V3 bought new in 1999, then upgraded with a Tualatin in 2001 and a 4200Ti in 2002 would be period correct in my books, as it's not far fetched to think that the owner would have upgraded the machine as such during it's lifespan. Similarly, a socket 7 system from 1997, upgraded with a Voodoo2 in '98 and a K6-2 in '99 would be "period correct" enough for me.

Jorpho wrote:

And why exactly does "a 1997 gaming/mid-range machine" mean "a machine that does not contain any parts newer than 1997" ? "A ma […]
Show full quote

sliderider wrote:

Your reading comprehension is somewhat lacking. The original poster said quite clearly in the first post that he was aiming for a 1997 vintage machine, which would exclude the Voodoo 2 which wasn't released until 1998.

Hexace wrote:

On my current project I'm aiming for a 1997 gaming/mid-range machine.

And why exactly does "a 1997 gaming/mid-range machine" mean "a machine that does not contain any parts newer than 1997" ? "A machine that plays games from around 1997" seems like an equally valid but also much more reasonable interpretation, especially considering that it can indeed be difficult to get games from that time working on current hardware.

Because really, what else are you going to do with a machine that does not contain any parts newer than 1997? If that's the only critereon you might as well fill it right up with any semi-random parts, and to heck with performance. Hence my question to Mr. Hexace.

Hexace wrote:

Maybe 1998 cards if there's a significant jump.

Specifying a particular year implies using only parts that were available from that particular year or earlier. I can play 1997 vintage games on my Phenom II x4, HD6870 system but that doesn't make it a 1997 gaming machine.

sliderider wrote:

Jorpho wrote:

And why exactly does "a 1997 gaming/mid-range machine" mean "a machine that does not contain any parts newer than 1997" ? "A ma […]
Show full quote

sliderider wrote:

Your reading comprehension is somewhat lacking. The original poster said quite clearly in the first post that he was aiming for a 1997 vintage machine, which would exclude the Voodoo 2 which wasn't released until 1998.

And why exactly does "a 1997 gaming/mid-range machine" mean "a machine that does not contain any parts newer than 1997" ? "A machine that plays games from around 1997" seems like an equally valid but also much more reasonable interpretation, especially considering that it can indeed be difficult to get games from that time working on current hardware.

Because really, what else are you going to do with a machine that does not contain any parts newer than 1997? If that's the only critereon you might as well fill it right up with any semi-random parts, and to heck with performance. Hence my question to Mr. Hexace.

Hexace wrote:

Maybe 1998 cards if there's a significant jump.

Specifying a particular year implies using only parts that were available from that particular year or earlier. I can play 1997 vintage games on my Phenom II x4, HD6870 system but that doesn't make it a 1997 gaming machine.

Even though the TS may have specified 1997, it may very well be that the TS doesn't take this too literally 😉

Hi all, just a quick update!

1. I landed the Diamond Voodoo 1 4MB for $10, but only just received it. I have installed it tonight & appears to be working to at least the pass-through level. 😀 I fear I may have slightly bent a pin while installing a crappy VGA gender changer. I removed the filthy AT PSU & replaced it with a semi-generic 400W ATX. I will attempt to rig the Turbo button to the motherboard header tomorrow.

2. While I thought I'd never physically seen a 3DFX in Australia, turns out a family friends machine I used a lot as a kid was armed with a Creative 16MB Banshee! They brought the machine to me out of the blue last week:

Pentium II 450MHz
128MB SDRAM
8GB Samsung HDD
Creative 3DFX Banshee 16MB

I cleaned it up & replaced a defective ODD & Sound card. I removed an EISA Adaptec AVA-1505AE. No idea what this is exactly or why it was installed in a home machine. I will try and post some more photo's later. 😀

Hexace wrote:

I cleaned it up & replaced a defective ODD & Sound card. I removed an EISA Adaptec AVA-1505AE. No idea what this is exactly or why it was installed in a home machine. I will try and post some more photo's later. 😀

That is a SCSI adapter.. it is possible that it could be used to connect to scanner or external disk drive.

Hexace wrote:

Hi all, just a quick update! […]
Show full quote

Hi all, just a quick update!

1. I landed the Diamond Voodoo 1 4MB for $10, but only just received it. I have installed it tonight & appears to be working to at least the pass-through level. 😀 I fear I may have slightly bent a pin while installing a crappy VGA gender changer. I removed the filthy AT PSU & replaced it with a semi-generic 400W ATX. I will attempt to rig the Turbo button to the motherboard header tomorrow.

2. While I thought I'd never physically seen a 3DFX in Australia, turns out a family friends machine I used a lot as a kid was armed with a Creative 16MB Banshee! They brought the machine to me out of the blue last week:

Pentium II 450MHz
128MB SDRAM
8GB Samsung HDD
Creative 3DFX Banshee 16MB

I cleaned it up & replaced a defective ODD & Sound card. I removed an EISA Adaptec AVA-1505AE. No idea what this is exactly or why it was installed in a home machine. I will try and post some more photo's later. 😀

Cool!

Gifted machine are always the best hehe 😁
And the Banshee definitely is an interesting card, even though Voodoo 3 is kinda better in every respect