Slashdot Mirror
The Good Old Days of 3Dfx
Fosters writes: "There's a short story about the old days of the 3D graphics world, when 3dfx (3Dfx) were kings of 3D and how things have changed in today's industry. The authors talk about how that came about, albeit somewhat light-heartedly. This sums it up as the author says, "To this day, I truly believe that this was the turning point for 3dfx and their SuperG downhill slide (that's a winter Olympics event). And it wasn't because of some fancy technology, a military leader (depends on how you look at some of the former VPs at 3dfx), or even a drill instructor named Zim (yeah, Starship Troopers- too easy). 3dfx started to lose their fan-boys and early technology adopters to NVIDIA then, who were waiting and watching, as 'Bugs' do, with TNT, TNT2 and something more than '22-bits' of color.'"
Well, they're both making chipsets. Wow.
3Dfx makes cards. nVidia does not - they simply make chips and sell them to manufacturers to make the card.
They both claim to be better than the other. Now, gee, am I the only one seeing atypical competition there?
3Dfx wants to innovate - ie; use a stagnant chipset for a base and make a better design. nVidia wants to go faster - ie; redesign every 6 to 12 months to milk out another 3FPS on systems that aren't already running into bus limitations.
Reguardless, I won't buy either. Why? Because they both claim OpenGL support. Now, I don't know about you folks, but seeing as I work in AutoCAD frequently, that means hardware support. Neither of them have it. ATI doesn't. #9 didn't. Why? Most of them view software as the future.
The mistake both nVidia and 3Dfx are making is that they're trying to take on the world when they don't have the staff, technology, or knowhow to do it. I've seen the Voodoo3, the Voodoo5, the TNT2, the GeForce MX, etcetera. The 2D quality, quite honestly, SUCKS. I've seen better 2D rendering in a blender. And I'm not talking a video blender, I'm talking the one in my kitchen. The refresh rates are for the most part inadequate for professional graphics work, the 2D image quality is abhorable at best, and considering I'm hitting bus limitations, I don't see how the extra 30FPS it's capable of in the chipset is going to help any.
I remember back about a year or two ago, I have a 3DLabs Permedia2 8M PCI card and the Voodoo had just come out. My friend snagged one, I scoffed. I said 'ha! My card already does all that stuff.' His 8M Voodoo continuously and routinely got smoked by my Permedia2 when it came to games. QuakeGL, Final Fantasy 7, etcetera. My Voodoo2's (2x 12M - for Unreal Tournament, there is no other option) combined with my #9 RevolutionIV 32M still are VERY hard pressed to beat the Permedia2 in any number of tests.
Now if you go read AnandTech sometime, you'll note that a lot of the cards these days - at least the gaming cards - are getting *OBSCENE* FPS rates. >70FPS. And when you pair the big names - nVidia, 3Dfx, Matrox, ATI, etc - up in, say, a pIII 733 or whatever it is, they ALL get the SAME RATE at 640x480x whatever depth. Why? The bus is full. Can't push any more data than that. And what are these companies doing about it?
3Dfx is adding an external powersupply for all the active cooling you're going to need just to run the Voodoo6 at normal speeds. nVidia is gleefully ignoring it and boasting a faster and bigger chip. ATI's touting more and more memory. Now, bear in mind, if the chipset doesn't use the memory for ZBuffering (mind you, not true ZBuffering), 64M of DDR SDRAM is doing you no good - 1800x1440 only needs around 14M or 16M IIRC. The companies are putting memory on the cards to make them look bigger, perhaps perform a bit better, and ignoring the core problems.
Quite frankly, I could care less whether or not 3Dfx is 'stagnating' or nVidia is 'amazing' or what have you. I need a card that works with and around bus limitations, that can do 2D and hardware OpenGL, that can do what I need. I don't buy mass marketed cards because unlike the Permedia2, which *was* mass marketed (Diamond FireGL 1000 Pro (PCI and AGP)) and an excellent card, today's cards are the equivalent of junk for me.
What do I use? Well, now instead of putting multiple cards in a single system, I'm stuck using top end cards. We're talking cards that cost more than your typical PC and more than a well configured laptop in some cases.
I just purchased, much against my desires but in tune with my *needs*, a $4,200 Wildcat 4210 graphics adapter. What is it? Dual pipeline. Dual head and a few more outputs. 90 Hz at 1824x1368. One AGP Pro 110 and two PCI connectors. All on a single card. That requires 110W of power. Wildcat was just bought by 3DLabs, the name in 'affordable' cards. (The Permedia3 is affordable, but not enough for what I do.) I was forced into spending more for a single video card than I spent on the entire system. ($2,935 for the curious. I reused the 18G SCSI-UW disks and controller.)
Now maybe some of you don't have this problem. Actually, I'm betting most of you don't. But for those of us who actually really *don't* do this for a living, per se, but need the hardware anyways (I use AutoCAD for various engine modification work on a very regular basis) are getting screwed by the dick wars between 3Dfx and company. It used to be that I could do just fine with a happy Permedia2 and AutoCAD R14. Then it was a #9 Revolution IV 32M. I went to go buy something with excellent 2D quality that could perform better than the #9 Revolution IV and found out that nothing does. If I want 2D, I have to go Matrox, which doesn't perform terribly well under AutoCAD R14 or AC2K. If I want real rendering performance, I have to go up to the professional cards, which I really didn't want to do. Now maybe the 4210 was overkill, but quite frankly, any of the cards is a pain to find and order. I could have probably gotten a 3DLabs Oxygen GVX420, but they also made the mistake of ignoring bus issues, and boom. The card ends up limited by the bus, performing really not all that much better than the other options. Just with ZBuffering and a $2300 pricetag. A single AGP/PCI combination (yes, two connectors, two PCBs) still runs into bus limits before the card hits its.
I don't know about you, but I really feel cheated.
Maybe I'll just put the Wildcat on eBay. Bidding starts at $1.
=RISCy Business
your company here.
shelby != ford
Ok well at least the first part of that cliche is true. The turning point of 3dfx is quite ironic though. After Nvidia came out with the Tnt (which was the first consumer chip to have 32 bit color), and both Nvidia and 3dfx began revealing their plans for their next generation chips, we were all surprised by 3dfx's arrogance (or naiveness) when they announced they would not include 32 bit color.
"Speed is King"
That was 3dfx's response when everyone questioned their next product, the voodoo 3. Alright so both products were relatively compareable in speed, and 3dfx still had some clout with glide games (tribes anyone?). Lessons (not) Learned?
Now what has happened? Nvidia introduces Hardware T&L on their chips, but the controversy is, who needs hardware T&L when there are no games supporting it (back then that is)?? 3dfx yet again sat on their laurels and decided to let Nvidia introduce it in their products first. While it's quite true that HW T&L was not really important back then, Nvidia was smart and marketed it as the next revolution in 3d acceleration. I mean, who wouldn't want to remove the CPU bottleneck and let the graphics card handle most of the 3d rendering? Sadly, 3dfx was only able to say "see? We have 32 bit now!"
The irony that is 3dfx
Now what do we have with the voodoo 5? Still, 3dfx REFUSES to incorporate onboard T&L when it's becomming more and more apparent that it is important these days. However, now 3dfx is ditching their "speed is king" philosophy and is trying to be innovative with their anti-aliasing and T-Buffer technology. But it seems that Nvidia has learned from 3dfx's mistakes and have included anti-aliasing technology of their own.
The road ahead?
After all these mistakes, has 3dfx learned their lesson yet? Who knows, perhaps 3dfx was right all along about not needing HW T&L right now (still, not many popular games support it) and they may very well outdo Nvidia with the release of the Napalm. But you have to admit, Nvidia played the marketing card extremely well with their Geforce cards, even if T&L wasn't really useful at the time. I pray to God that 3dfx will get their feet back on the ground, otherwise we may see another monopoly in the computing industry.
How is it that, in January, I bought a dang-fast TNT2 for $60, while the Voodoo2, a slower card, sold for over $100 everywhere I looked? Simple - the different board manufacturers compete with each other, trying to sell their TNT2 board over somebody else's. The 3dfx board manufacturer just tries to sell their boards to Voodoo zealots, who are, for the most part, GeForce believers now.
Tell me what makes you so afraid
Of all those people you say you hate