VOGONS


Your opinion on the ATi Rage IIC and Rage Pro

Topic actions

Reply 100 of 116, by W.x.

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
rasz_pl wrote on 2023-04-11, 00:27:

$200 Rage Pro could barely match Verite V1000 in middle of 1998 IF you paired it with top of the line $700 CPU

Hmm, don't have feeling Rage Pro was so expensive in May 1998.
Are you sure, you aren't looking on Ati All-in-Wonder version?
In terms of gaming, you need to look at SGR-mem Ati Rage Pro version called ATi Xpert@Play. They were around 5500CZK after taxes in march 1998. The exchange rate was changing a lot in that time
https://freecurrencyrates.com/en/exchange-rat … SD-CZK/1997/cbr

so it could range between like 140-190$. But that's because double tax was payed (both in US, and after import to CZ). In US, price had to be lower. I would guess it was already around $150, maybe even lower like $133.

Reply 101 of 116, by rasz_pl

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
Meatball wrote on 2023-04-11, 13:23:

Here is an interesting battle royale review including most 3D cards of the time as of January 1998 including CPU scaling, image quality, D3D, Quake 1 & 2, etc.

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/3d-accel … ew-step,51.html

fantastic period correct find, thank you

Putas wrote on 2023-04-11, 14:27:

But those are statements about user experience, Not about performance of the hardware.

Meatball provided January 1998 '3D Accelerator Review Step One - 3D Performance, the Real Deal' is a great snapshot of reality at the time.
OpenGL performance was 0 fps across the board 😀 https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/3d-accel … step,51-20.html
but ok. Turok has a bunch of render paths, D3D/m3d/PowerVR and ATI optimized CIF.
https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/3d-accel … -step,51-2.html
https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/3d-accel … -step,51-4.html
Rage Pro is only beating a joke Sis card.

Putas wrote on 2023-04-11, 14:27:

Of course Rendition and 3dfx had a headstart with Quake, they helped to develop their ports. Otherwise OpenGL would not be used for games and that's why it took other companies off guard and why it is silly to judge them by the game.

Nothing stopped ATI from investing in OpenGL driver in 1995, other than abysmal Rage2 hardware that is 😀 with missing blending/transparency modes generating nightmare like graphics. I cant take seriously an argument that everyone was suddenly surprised by the fact the ONLY serious 3D API around (opengl) became important and influential.

Putas wrote on 2023-04-11, 14:27:

AtiQuake came earlier and is probably the slowest way to play the game.

atiquake released in June 1998, a ~year into the life of Rage Pro. To be fair I dont remember ATI ever caring about driver/software support.

Putas wrote on 2023-04-11, 14:27:

What makes you think DirectX driver was 2x slower?

almost 2x https://youtu.be/8pDIraOMWug?t=745

W.x. wrote on 2023-04-11, 23:19:
rasz_pl wrote on 2023-04-11, 00:27:

$200 Rage Pro could barely match Verite V1000 in middle of 1998 IF you paired it with top of the line $700 CPU

Hmm, don't have feeling Rage Pro was so expensive in May 1998.

I meant it as you bought $200 Rage Pro when it came out in 1997, and even a year later with the fastest most expensive CPU available and newest improved drivers it still delivered worse results than 1997 budged option.

W.x. wrote on 2023-04-11, 23:19:

I would guess it was already around $150, maybe even lower like $133.

yes it got slightly cheaper in 1998, but not far enough to reflect its "performance". For contrast S3 quickly faced reality and price corrected hard.

AT&T Globalyst/FIC 486-GAC-2 Cache Module reproduction
Zenith Data Systems (ZDS) ZBIOS 'MFM-300 Monitor' reverse engineering

Reply 102 of 116, by 386SX

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

Question: about the whole Rage Pro "Turbo" thing, are we really sure they didn't change a single thing into the chip? Who discovered that in its time?

Reply 103 of 116, by Putas

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
rasz_pl wrote on 2023-04-12, 03:57:
Putas wrote on 2023-04-11, 14:27:

Of course Rendition and 3dfx had a headstart with Quake, they helped to develop their ports. Otherwise OpenGL would not be used for games and that's why it took other companies off guard and why it is silly to judge them by the game.

Nothing stopped ATI from investing in OpenGL driver in 1995, other than abysmal Rage2 hardware that is

Just more non-sense.

rasz_pl wrote on 2023-04-12, 03:57:

I cant take seriously an argument that everyone was suddenly surprised by the fact the ONLY serious 3D API around (opengl) became important and influential.

For games yes, that is what happened.

rasz_pl wrote on 2023-04-12, 03:57:
Putas wrote on 2023-04-11, 14:27:

AtiQuake came earlier and is probably the slowest way to play the game.

atiquake released in June 1998, a ~year into the life of Rage Pro. To be fair I dont remember ATI ever caring about driver/software support.

In May, but whatever, soon there was better implementation.

rasz_pl wrote on 2023-04-12, 03:57:
Putas wrote on 2023-04-11, 14:27:

What makes you think DirectX driver was 2x slower?

almost 2x https://youtu.be/8pDIraOMWug?t=745

But is that the early driver? Only compared by 3dMark?

Reply 104 of 116, by rasz_pl

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
Putas wrote on 2023-04-12, 07:21:

For games yes, that is what happened.

Not in case of 3dfx. It took Nvidia what, 4 months to release alpha opengl icd for riva 128? 5 for public beta 131:
"RIVA 128 - Open GL/Win95 Driver
Public Beta Release
February 1998"
Same 5 months for Rendition.

Putas wrote on 2023-04-12, 07:21:
rasz_pl wrote on 2023-04-12, 03:57:
Putas wrote on 2023-04-11, 14:27:

AtiQuake came earlier and is probably the slowest way to play the game.

atiquake released in June 1998, a ~year into the life of Rage Pro. To be fair I dont remember ATI ever caring about driver/software support.

In May, but whatever, soon there was better implementation.

"The schedule is May 15, 1998 for a Beta, and June 30 for the Final Release. This date is subject to change at the discretion of ATI Technologies Inc."
but the only atiquake I can find has 1998-06-09 timestamps
ATI was already promising opengl drivers in April 1997 https://www.bloomberg.com/press-releases/1997 … -gaming-markets Of course they also promised opengl driver for RAGE II, so more lies.
Apparently they delivered "something" in 1997 because https://www.anandtech.com/show/6/2
"ATI Xpert@Work used the beta OpenGL ICD from ATI"
afaik non public driver, and curiously delivers single digit framerate on slow CPUs making me think its clever software emulation

btw even ATI famed 2D acceleration doesnt seem to be all that hot when faced with Riva 128 https://www.anandtech.com/show/6/3

Putas wrote on 2023-04-11, 14:27:
rasz_pl wrote on 2023-04-12, 03:57:
Putas wrote on 2023-04-11, 14:27:

What makes you think DirectX driver was 2x slower?

almost 2x https://youtu.be/8pDIraOMWug?t=745

But is that the early driver? Only compared by 3dMark?

3Dmark comparison in one video not enough? there is no pleasing you 😉

AT&T Globalyst/FIC 486-GAC-2 Cache Module reproduction
Zenith Data Systems (ZDS) ZBIOS 'MFM-300 Monitor' reverse engineering

Reply 105 of 116, by W.x.

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
rasz_pl wrote on 2023-04-12, 03:57:
W.x. wrote on 2023-04-11, 23:19:

I would guess it was already around $150, maybe even lower like $133.

yes it got slightly cheaper in 1998, but not far enough to reflect its "performance". For contrast S3 quickly faced reality and price corrected hard.

Well, first note, Rage Pro in its prime had one big disadvantage, they could not make working and good OpenGL driver. Now, many people judge rage pro only according latests drivers (usually from late 1998 period, or up to 2001-2002). But in its prime (1997, and early 1998), it was Direct3D only card. As you can see in Tomshardware review from january 1998, it still cannot deliver any fps in GLQuake and Quake 2 games.
Quake 2 benchmark had becoming a standard quickly for measuring performance in reviews, and it didnt put good light on rage pro, so after january 1998, they worked hard to finally make OpenGL drivers. Not sure, when they were released, but on may 1998 Ati driver CD, that I have, it was already there. It didn't install with official drivers , but it was there, in installation CD. But it was more like Quake 2 openGL driver, not universal.

So, you are right, that price seem little bit too high. Ati realized, that they cannot compete with Voodoo1, which was simply better, and always tried to put price just under it, close enough. Why?

It's because, Rage Pro had several advantages.
First, Direct 3D performance of rage pro, was very close too voodoo1. 3dfx had also problems with drivers in first phase, and its Direct3D performance was never too great. So when you're comparing Direct3D games, you can see, that rage pro is about same performance level as voodoo1.
But it has several advantages:
1) It is 2d/3D card, with good, almost matrox-like , Image quality. If you want to use voodoo1, and have such good quality, you need to buy 2d adapter from good manufacturer, not cheapsest one. And it adds to cost.
2) It has also AGP version, which can come handy, when you are short of free PCI slots. voodoo1 is PCI consumer... if you want to use 2D card, you usually go with PCI , so it eats up 2 PCI slots. With AGP rage pro, you can save 2 PCI slots, and go with AGP, if you have AGP motherboard
3)It has 800x600 resolution in 3D. 8MB version allowed even high 2D resolution. With voodoo1 + 2D card combo, to get 8MB 2D card, you would need really high amount of money, over 2MB (usually) solution. This was really advantage for some people.
4)Ati Rage Pro worked also in windowed mode. Voodoo1 was full screen only card.
5)Rage Pro offered optional TV out, and ATi also supported good DVD/ TV out support with drivers/software. Again, this was incredible advantage for some people.
Imagine, they wanted to use voodoo1, how much need they pay for 2D solution with 4MB or 8MB memory, and TV out. (this is btw reason, why S3 realized this and in latest Virge version, GX2, they added TV out)
(very small ) 6) advantage Ati Rage pro had still CIF, with its performance, it was smoking some games (Tomb Raider 1 for example)
(to the S3 thing, and their much lower price reality check, you cannot compare Virge and Rage Pro, Virge was competing with Rage II, not rage pro. S3 didnt have any decent card in 1997, they were just out of mainstream businness, until not so good S3 Savage 3d, so they basicaly skipped 1997-mid 1998 generation of graphic cards, in which Rage pro belongs )

These all advantages were reason, why they were so confident to put Rage Pro price just under voodoo1. You cannot just compare voodoo1 with rage pro based only just few benchmarks (and even OpenGL later ones, where voodoo1 performed good, or they even used Glide version), they didnt targeted equal audience.

Reply 106 of 116, by Putas

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
rasz_pl wrote on 2023-04-12, 03:57:
Putas wrote on 2023-04-11, 14:27:
rasz_pl wrote on 2023-04-12, 12:43:

But is that the early driver? Only compared by 3dMark?

3Dmark comparison in one video not enough? there is no pleasing you 😉

I don't think you will please anyone who wants to know the real state of affairs with sweeping generalisations based on one game or application.

Reply 107 of 116, by The Serpent Rider

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
W.x. wrote:

Ati Rage Pro worked also in windowed mode. Voodoo1 was full screen only card.

That's hardly beneficial for desktop cards of that era, due to performance penalty for already abysmal 3D capabilities. And Rage Pro was ill-suited for professional use cases anyway.

I must be some kind of standard: the anonymous gangbanger of the 21st century.

Reply 108 of 116, by rasz_pl

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
Putas wrote on 2023-04-13, 06:50:
rasz_pl wrote on 2023-04-12, 03:57:
Putas wrote on 2023-04-11, 14:27:

But is that the early driver? Only compared by 3dMark?

3Dmark comparison in one video not enough? there is no pleasing you 😉

I don't think you will please anyone who wants to know the real state of affairs with sweeping generalisations based on one game or application.

we are at three now thank you very much ::) quasi opengl quake, directx 3dmark, CIF optimized Turok

AT&T Globalyst/FIC 486-GAC-2 Cache Module reproduction
Zenith Data Systems (ZDS) ZBIOS 'MFM-300 Monitor' reverse engineering

Reply 109 of 116, by W.x.

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
The Serpent Rider wrote on 2023-04-13, 07:23:

That's hardly beneficial for desktop cards of that era, due to performance penalty for already abysmal 3D capabilities. And Rage Pro was ill-suited for professional use cases anyway.

There were benchmark programs like Atitool and similiar/other programs, that renders in window. Its advantage, to have backup to run such programs. It's not proffesional use. It's still home use. But for non-gaming applications.
Another advantage - you can better alt-tab programs, when you use multitasking, you switch it to window.
It's still advantage for some users.

Reply 110 of 116, by The Serpent Rider

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

There were benchmark programs like Atitool and similiar/other programs, that renders in window.

Which has nothing to do with crusty 3D accelerator that barely can do simple texturing with filtering.

It's still home use. But for non-gaming applications.

Which are practically none. Especially for only functional API on Rage Pro - Direct3D.

Another advantage - you can better alt-tab programs

You can alt-tab from exclusive fullscreen just as fine. Only early 3Dfx and maybe PowerVR had some slight issues with that.

I must be some kind of standard: the anonymous gangbanger of the 21st century.

Reply 111 of 116, by Takedasun

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie
Putas wrote on 2023-04-12, 07:21:
rasz_pl wrote on 2023-04-12, 03:57:
Putas wrote on 2023-04-11, 14:27:

AtiQuake came earlier and is probably the slowest way to play the game.

atiquake released in June 1998, a ~year into the life of Rage Pro. To be fair I dont remember ATI ever caring about driver/software support.

In May, but whatever, soon there was better implementation.

"1. Accidentally released Alpha: OpenGL driver with major z-buffering problems released to gauge baseline performance. File glqvxxxx.exe file eleased March 9, 1998.
2. Beta1: 50% better peformance than pre-release ALPHA driver. AGP cards shown to be performing below that of PCI. Z-buffering problems still reduced by still present. 460K beta1.zip file released March 23, 1998. Used by Anandtech in his CPU/accelerated chipset comparisons.
3. Beta2: Most z-buffering problems eliminated. AGP framerate on par with PCI cards, now. Released March 30, 1998.
4. Beta3: Similar to Beta2 driver but Hexen II used to flush out more problems. Final release until full ICD. File releaased on April 16, 1998. "
https://www.angelfire.com/ca/rchau/opengl.html

Official:
ATI Quake OpenGL driver for Windows 95 and Windows 98
___________________________________________________

RELEASE NOTES
May 1998

Reply 112 of 116, by rasz_pl

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
Takedasun wrote on 2023-04-14, 18:20:

4. Beta3: Similar to Beta2 driver but Hexen II used to flush out more problems. Final release until full ICD. File releaased on April 16, 1998. "
https://www.angelfire.com/ca/rchau/opengl.html

yeah, this one has 1998-06-09 timestamp

AT&T Globalyst/FIC 486-GAC-2 Cache Module reproduction
Zenith Data Systems (ZDS) ZBIOS 'MFM-300 Monitor' reverse engineering

Reply 113 of 116, by W.x.

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
The Serpent Rider wrote on 2023-04-14, 14:21:
Which has nothing to do with crusty 3D accelerator that barely can do simple texturing with filtering. […]
Show full quote

There were benchmark programs like Atitool and similiar/other programs, that renders in window.

Which has nothing to do with crusty 3D accelerator that barely can do simple texturing with filtering.

It's still home use. But for non-gaming applications.

Which are practically none. Especially for only functional API on Rage Pro - Direct3D.

Another advantage - you can better alt-tab programs

You can alt-tab from exclusive fullscreen just as fine. Only early 3Dfx and maybe PowerVR had some slight issues with that.

You probably didn't get , what I was speaking about in that post. I've listed all advantages, that it had over voodoo1. The group, that use them, will find themself on its own. It doesn't need your judgement or permission, how beneficial it is. It is only point of view. Ati listed all advantages it had, and set increased price according to it.
Also, you are a king now, because you know, how future was. In 1997, noone knew, what next year or 2 years brought. It was always nice to have rendering in window mode, for greater compatibility in future, as assurance.

Reply 114 of 116, by Babasha

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
W.x. wrote on 2023-04-15, 04:06:
The Serpent Rider wrote on 2023-04-14, 14:21:
Which has nothing to do with crusty 3D accelerator that barely can do simple texturing with filtering. […]
Show full quote

There were benchmark programs like Atitool and similiar/other programs, that renders in window.

Which has nothing to do with crusty 3D accelerator that barely can do simple texturing with filtering.

It's still home use. But for non-gaming applications.

Which are practically none. Especially for only functional API on Rage Pro - Direct3D.

Another advantage - you can better alt-tab programs

You can alt-tab from exclusive fullscreen just as fine. Only early 3Dfx and maybe PowerVR had some slight issues with that.

You probably didn't get , what I was speaking about in that post. I've listed all advantages, that it had over voodoo1. The group, that use them, will find themself on its own. It doesn't need your judgement or permission, how beneficial it is. It is only point of view. Ati listed all advantages it had, and set increased price according to it.
Also, you are a king now, because you know, how future was. In 1997, noone knew, what next year or 2 years brought. It was always nice to have rendering in window mode, for greater compatibility in future, as assurance.

+100500
ATI Rage II/Pro/XL core cards produced until 2023, installed in billions of PC/Macs/notebooks, officially supported in Win 7 and i will not be surprised to see their drivers in Win 8-8.1-10-11 😉

3Dfx Voodoo 1 died in 1998, 3Dfx company died in 2002

Thats all folks!

Need help? Begin with photo and model of your hardware 😉

Reply 115 of 116, by W.x.

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
Babasha wrote on 2023-04-15, 06:25:

ATI Rage II/Pro/XL core cards produced until 2023, installed in billions of PC/Macs/notebooks, officially supported in Win 7 and i will not be surprised to see their drivers in Win 8-8.1-10-11 😉

Yeah, but that was because low price, when it went out of 3d mainstream, and because of its 2d capabilities, not 3d. After new generation of 3d accelerators appeared in 1998, rage pro went into low-end mode, also its die shrunk chip, rage xl. It was used in many servers, and server motherboards, but I doubt because 3d windowed mode. They used it as cheap 2d display adapter, I would say, with good quality analog output, and ability to display in 1024x768x32bit or higher , as they had 4MB-8MB memory. Also, PCI variation could come handy, rage pro/xl had pci variation. Maybe, there was even more particular reasons for server use, I don't know about. Because obvious, these chips were favored after year 2000 for that purpose.

Reply 116 of 116, by Babasha

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
W.x. wrote on 2023-04-15, 07:03:
Babasha wrote on 2023-04-15, 06:25:

ATI Rage II/Pro/XL core cards produced until 2023, installed in billions of PC/Macs/notebooks, officially supported in Win 7 and i will not be surprised to see their drivers in Win 8-8.1-10-11 😉

Yeah, but that was because low price, when it went out of 3d mainstream, and because of its 2d capabilities, not 3d. After new generation of 3d accelerators appeared in 1998, rage pro went into low-end mode, also its die shrunk chip, rage xl. It was used in many servers, and server motherboards, but I doubt because 3d windowed mode. They used it as cheap 2d display adapter, I would say, with good quality analog output, and ability to display in 1024x768x32bit or higher , as they had 4MB-8MB memory. Also, PCI variation could come handy, rage pro/xl had pci variation. Maybe, there was even more particular reasons for server use, I don't know about. Because obvious, these chips were favored after year 2000 for that purpose.

So, ATI immortal universal fighter in all segments and prices of computing and video. 3Dfx Voodoo shortlived gamming-only product! 😀

Need help? Begin with photo and model of your hardware 😉