Slashdot Mirror


3dfx Voodoo Graphics Gets Windows XP x64 Support

ryszards writes, "GlideXP author Ryan 'Colourless' Nunn has turned his insanity up a notch with a driver that allows running the 32-bit NT Glide .dlls for a Voodoo Graphics board on Windows XP x64. Already supporting Voodoo Graphics and Voodoo 2 on 32-bit Windows XP, adding XP x64 to the mix lets even more folks reminisce about the good old early days of consumer 3D acceleration hardware. Any excuse to fire up GLQuake one more time!"

104 comments

  1. Much better choises than GLQuake available by inio · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Really, GLQuake? you want quake-glide - it talks glide natively instead of through the OpenGL Wrapper. Or better yet Unreal/Unreal Tourment. Those games never looked better than when they were running on a Voodoo 2.

    1. Re:Much better choises than GLQuake available by c0l0 · · Score: 4, Informative

      They did, on a Voodoo 3 or, better yet, Voodoo 5 ;)

      The Voodoo 2 totally lacked 32bit rendering (what was less of a problem back then, given that the other cards' performance numbers were not high enough to render anything at 32bit reliably anyway), and the Voodoo 3 "only" boasted a so-called "22bit post-filter", which provided a MUCH better visual experience at negligible framerate losses. However, (at least european) gaming mags went rabid about the fact that "Voodoo 3 still does not support 32bit color depth!1" (which, again, was nothing to really care about, given other cards' performance at True Color settings!), and until today I'm sure that this kind of hype (and pushing of NVIDIA's TNT2-Chip along with it) did a great deal to sink 3DFX in the end.

      Voodoo 5 supported True Color rendering from the beginning, but the market (or rather the marketing machinery) had moved on to the next hot subject, namely "T&L", by then (which, again, had virtually no real impact on anything that truly mattered for real world games), and due to lack of sales and the high costs 3DFX burdened itself with by acquiring STB, one of the greatest computer graphics companies ever went out of business. Just sad. :(

      --
      :%s/Open Source/Free Software/g

      YTARY!
    2. Re:Much better choises than GLQuake available by jacksonj04 · · Score: 1

      Not to mention many monitors' colour quality was poor at best unless you shelled out for expensive ones. 32 bit colour is kinda unnecessary when you can't tell the difference between shades of red.

      --
      How many people can read hex if only you and dead people can read hex?
    3. Re:Much better choises than GLQuake available by rucs_hack · · Score: 1

      FuHQuake, now that's where it's at.

      All these years, and quake is still my DM game of choice, thanks to the FuH.

      Zigurat Vertigo for teh win. I don't think that level has ever been equalled for pure high-larious fun.

    4. Re:Much better choises than GLQuake available by ichigo+2.0 · · Score: 1

      Having owned a Voodoo2 I can tell you that the difference between 16- and 32-bit color was noticeable, and I had a shitty 15" no-name CRT at the time. Dithering caused a very noticeable pattern in 16-bit mode.

    5. Re:Much better choises than GLQuake available by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Yes, indeed...
      I had the good fortune to play glquake on an SGI Onyx connected to a 24" screen via 13W3 (shielded cable) back in those days, it put the voodoo cards to shame.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    6. Re:Much better choises than GLQuake available by RESPAWN · · Score: 1

      Really, the difference between 16bit color and 32bit color probably isn't all that much such that you will really notice the difference while in the middle of a heated game. I actually use a Voodoo3 3000 PCI as a secondary video card. When looking at the two monitors side by side in Windows, I can barely notice a difference at all. Granted, I do most of my photo editing on the primary display with full 32bit color, but there's really nothing wrong with the display on my Voodoo card. Why should I go out and spend cash on a new PCI card for a secondary display when I already have a perfectly functioning display card lying around? Kudos to this guy for developing the drivers.

      --

      If Murphy's Law can go wrong, it will.

    7. Re:Much better choises than GLQuake available by internewt · · Score: 1

      The Voodoo 3 can do 32bit 2D, ie the desktop, but not 3D. I used to use a PCI one too in my multimonitor set up before replacing it with a cooler running Matrox G450 DH. The 3dfx based card was nice for those games that were directX 3 but had glide, and for shit like glide Winamp plugins. DirectX 3 had no hardware accelerated support, so glide was the one of the only ways to do it for a while on Windows. Need for Speed 2 SE and Wipeout something or other were like that, IIRC.

      --
      Car analogies break down.
  2. Hrm ... by Sonic+McTails · · Score: 2

    Judging by the thread, it seems Vodoo opened up the sources to there drivers since he talks about how they were written.

    Can someone please explain in detail about this? It would be news to me if said sources were actually available, and I simply didn't misread the thread.

    --
    This signature was left intentionally blank.
    1. Re:Hrm ... by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 3, Informative

      It looks like the low level kernel drivers were just memory mapping and port io.
      The glide interface DLLs (still 32bit) can then communicate correctly with the card using this minimal kernel driver.

      --
      liqbase :: faster than paper
    2. Re:Hrm ... by Zooka · · Score: 2, Informative

      ''it seems Vodoo opened up the sources''

      3dfx was acquired by NVIDIA in 2000.

    3. Re:Hrm ... by GoblinKiller · · Score: 1

      The drivers leaked onto the internet. A whole cd full of documents about 3dfx and the code of the drivers were leaked and therefore the 3dfx drivermakers can make drivers practically from scratch as far as I have understood. The development is going on at 3dfxzone.it but the source code may be very difficult to find. The releaser don't have it up anylonger. Maybe through a p2p-network... The Glide drivers were made open source by 3dfx itself when they wanted it to work on linux.

    4. Re:Hrm ... by i.r.id10t · · Score: 1

      And at least the Linux drivers were open back in the X 3.3.x days...

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
    5. Re:Hrm ... by jrronimo · · Score: 1

      The source isn't too hard to find. I used to host it myself. Ask just about anyone over at x-3dfx and you should be able to get it. It's a .rar that's about 30 megs that expands to about 300. It's pretty interesting to go through.

  3. Insanity! by NeuralAbyss · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Absolute insanity... although, I guess this proves that Voodoo cards aren't just legacy hardware.. they're supported..

    1. Re:Insanity! by triffid_98 · · Score: 1
      The card is (in theory) supported, the problem is the games aren't. I haven't tried firing up Interstate 76' or Mechwarrior 2 lately, but I'm pretty sure dos/glide/sb16 is not a recipe for success under Windows 2000. It's really too bad, I had a blast playing those games 'back in the day' with my Voodoo2.

      Absolute insanity... although, I guess this proves that Voodoo cards aren't just legacy hardware.. they're supported..
  4. Re:new driver by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    You're a partial faggot. Salesman.

  5. Performance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Any performance improvements? :D
    Has anyone tried it on a system with 4GB+ of RAM? :D

    1. Re:Performance? by empaler · · Score: 1

      What kind of system is built with 4 gigs RAM and 2D graphics card with a 3D add-on card?
      Insane!

  6. Speaking of Glide by NXprime · · Score: 1

    Has anyone bothered to make a Glide Emulator for some of those games that only supported Glide. There's got to be 1 or 2 Montezuma's Return fans out there :/

    1. Re:Speaking of Glide by IceFreak2000 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yeah, there are loads of 'em

      I used to use a Glide Wrapper so I could play The Sentinel Returns properly on my system.

      --
      Life is like a sewer; what you get out of it depends on what you put into it...
    2. Re:Speaking of Glide by CowboyBob500 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Don't know about Montezuma's Return, but I often get a serious case of Montezuma's Revenge after visiting my local Mexican restaurant and I'm not a fan...

      Bob

    3. Re:Speaking of Glide by Atman+Binstock · · Score: 5, Informative

      Has anyone bothered to make a Glide Emulator for some of those games that only supported Glide. There's got to be 1 or 2 Montezuma's Return fans out there :/

      Dunno about that...

      Last time I saw it running on Glide under a recent Windows, there seemed to be a bug where it didn't wait for vsync properly and the CPU got way ahead of the graphics, leading to really ugly control latency. I probably screwed up somewhere :(
      The win32 software renderer didn't have this problem.

      -lead programmer of Montezuma's Return

    4. Re:Speaking of Glide by Phaid · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yup. There are a number of Glide emulators, but dgVoodoo is the one I have had the most success with (for Red Baron 3D). If it matters, it's also likely the highest performing one since it is a direct Glide to DirectX emulation, whereas most of the others were Glide to OpenGL emulators. I say "if it matters" because on a modern system the overhead of this conversion will make no difference given the simplicity of the games that used Glide.

    5. Re:Speaking of Glide by nebula169 · · Score: 1

      hate it when the shit jes glides right out

    6. Re:Speaking of Glide by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Yes, there was a glide emulator...
      I remember people using it to run UltraHLE (the N64 emulator, which only supported glide) on non voodoo cards.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    7. Re:Speaking of Glide by archen · · Score: 1

      You sure? I heard that game was the shit.

    8. Re:Speaking of Glide by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, there are several Glide wrappers, however, Zeckensack's is leagues above everything else, and boasts such features as resolution doubling and global/per-application settings.

      Works great with everything I throw at it.

      http://www.zeckensack.de/glide/index.html

  7. Voodoo 2. by __aalwyc6372 · · Score: 1

    not that i mind much, but who uses voodoo 2 these days?

    1. Re:Voodoo 2. by SCHPONG · · Score: 1

      You must be new here..

  8. Re:Daryl Strauss would be proud by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    That's one of the real practical benefits of open source - old peripherals keep working practically forever, whereas commercial closed-source vendors have no incentive to port their old drivers to new operating systems and machine architectures.

  9. Re:Daryl Strauss would be proud by PygmySurfer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Wow linux had to wait 6 months to get this driver, it only took XP x64 7 1/2 years!

    Yeah, and only the first 6 years of that timeframe was spent waiting for the x64 edition of Windows XP

    Microsoft Windows XP Professional x64 Edition released on April 25, 2005 by Microsoft is a variation of the typical 32-bit Windows XP operating system for x86 personal computers.

    Oh wait, the linked article doesn't even say anything about x64 support for the Linux 3Dfx driver. So what exactly are you trying to say, again?

  10. Released before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your webpage says you released them in 2005. No biggie, though, and yeah, you're definately crazy.

    That's news to me!!

  11. does this mean.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    .. i will be able to play duke nukem forever on windows x64?

  12. Good old glide... RIP by ZubinTavaria · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I remember the good old days, when you got a free copy of POD Racer with your 3DFX Voodoo card, and then your eyes popped out with the visual brilliance of the 3D accelerated graphics :)

    Even today, very few games have made me react like I did ("OMG lookit that!") to the Voodoo driven games of yesteryear - did anyone here run Unreal 1 in "software" and then in "glide" and compare the experience?

    Back then, we thought that the Trident, nVidia Riva TNT and Cirrus Logic graphics cards were crap compared to the 8 MB overpowered Voodoo 1, which let you run games full screen at 512x384 :) //ends nostalgia trip and thanks the lord for his nVidia 7400 Geforce Go

    1. Re:Good old glide... RIP by VGPowerlord · · Score: 4, Insightful

      How about Quake in software mode and then in GLQuake?

      Which, of course, brings up the biggest problem with 3dfx cards prior to the Voodoo 4: OpenGL support. OpenGL was implemented for GLQuake, Quake 2, Half-life, Hexen 2, Heretic 2, and Sin using special "MiniGL" drivers that changed specific OpenGL instructions to their Glide equivalents.

      --
      GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
    2. Re:Good old glide... RIP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You must be forgetfull :P the riva TNT was superior to the voodoo1, you must be thinking of the riva 128.

      And 512x384 resolution can't be right, the standard original 4MB 3dfx did 640x480 full screen with z-buffer, and 800x600 fullscreen with no z-buffer (flashing poly's yuck)

    3. Re:Good old glide... RIP by ZubinTavaria · · Score: 1

      Actually, I'm quite sure about the 512x384 resolution thing - I remember it well because that's the only resolution at which my good old P2 350 with 256 MB of RAM would run Unreal 1 smoothly. Maybe it had something to do with my monitor's supported resolution modes? As the the Riva TNT being more powerul, well 5 mins of Google and I can't find any old benchmarks and reviews, so I hope I'm right :)

    4. Re:Good old glide... RIP by CaseyB · · Score: 1

      Voodoo Graphics (aka Voodoo 1) definitely supported 640x480. Myself, I usually ran it at 512 too. Even that was so much better than 320, that I was willing to trade for a few extra fps.

    5. Re:Good old glide... RIP by TravisO · · Score: 1

      Actually when I got Unreal 1, I had a P2-233 (on a dual mobo as I assumed dual cpus would be the future, little did I know at the time your OS had to support it. Well at least I never bought the 2nd CPU, I know I was wrong about duals when the P2 400mhz came out). I had a Diamond MM Viper card, which had a VERY based 3d chip and iirc, Unreal 1 didn't support it. Anyways, Unreal 1 on software rendering (well at least I had fast MMX, I figured) was a mix blessing; visually, the game was amazing, and the beginning level had more atmosphere than I had ever seen in a game before. The view distance was very large and the skies were lush and very high (unlike Quake which seems fairly close). But there was some serious shortcomings, obviously the frame rate was unbearable when you fought an enemy (the advanced AI ate up a ton of cpu) and things like water couldn't use alpha effects, so instead they used a checkerboard trick where half of the pixels showed what was in the water, and the other half showed the water. By the way, frame rate while swimming was unbearable too. I let a friend /w a Pentium 1 "borrow" my game, and I told him this was a P2 only game. It was totally unplayable for him. I very quickly bought a Diamond MM Monster Voodoo 2 for a mere $175 (it was a steal at the time, and a lot of people were speaking highly of Monster's quality and constant driver updates) by the time I was at the 4th level /w software rendering. I replayed the game from scratch and the experience was so much better, obviously I could play in 16bit instead graphics, I now had alpha effects so the water, clouds, explosions and lighting was amazing. My first 3d accelerated game was MDK on my Viper 330 card, and since I could run 16bit, I was blown away by the colors. But Unreal 1 on a Voodoo 2 is what really sold me on the "new age" of accelerated 3d gaming with it's large levels, rich 2 layer skies, alpha effects and smart enemies.

    6. Re:Good old glide... RIP by TravisO · · Score: 1

      Smoothly is a relative term, but with a P2 350mhz on a TNT I would have expected the game to play well (at the time 30fps was what people aimed for) at 640x480 as long as you used 16bit rendering. Perhaps you were running 32bit rendering and didn't know 16bit was faster, or perhaps I'm being too optimistic with that old hardware. Despite, I also ran the 512x384 because it looked fairly decent (for a 3d game) and still gave great performance. When I got my Voodoo2, I'm pretty sure I ran 640x480. All this talk of Unreal 1, along with a documentary on the Unreal franchise on G4 makes me want to bust out my old copy and check it out on today's hardware.

  13. Re:Daryl Strauss would be proud by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    well tell your debian then to install, the latest ATI or NVIDIA graphics card. Its not anybodys fault that you still have hardware like that old. I mean is good for a collection, but there is no sense using it, unless you just have a console running on your server, and you wont even need a graphics card anyway. Good luck installing them ;)

  14. Re:Daryl Strauss would be proud by pnewhook · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'd argue that's not a very much utilized benefit. If you have old hardware you'd be more likely to keep the old software as well. Old software and old hardware will work exactly the same now as they would have 5 or 10 years ago.

    If you are going to get new software, you'd probably get new supported hardware as well to get any benefit out of it.

    --
    Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
  15. Re:Daryl Strauss would be proud by Agent+Green · · Score: 2, Insightful

    FWIW, I have a first-generation SB Live card (remember the one with the Live! Drive??) which I've had since 1998. It has and continues to work flawlessly, even in Vista Beta 2.

    Now, RC1 comes along and Creative decides to not release a driver for it. Now, granted, the X-Fi series of cards is far, far ahead and beyond what my SBLive does. However ... there is nothing wrong with my SBLive now, and I haven't really seen much of a benefit to upgrade the card.

    Besides, the thought of buying PCI anything with PCIExpress becoming more and more common is crazy.

    --
    // Agent Green (Ian / IU7 / KB1JQO)
    // IEEE 802.3: All 10base Are Belong To Us
  16. Oh wow... by Tatsh · · Score: 1

    LOOK GUYS I CAN RUN ULTRAHLE ON WINDOWS XP X64 NOW! OH WAIT, NO I CAN'T...UltraHLE still doesn't work on XP.

    1. Re:Oh wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      when there's Project64 who cares about UltraHLE?

    2. Re:Oh wow... by jonwil · · Score: 1

      Or wait untill this guy
      http://www.mameworld.net/vlinde/
      finishes the work he is doing and makes Nintendo 64 emulation possible the way it should have been done (instead of that "HLE" crap most N64 emulators use)

  17. SLI by pbjones · · Score: 3, Funny

    I hope it supports using SLI, I still have at least 2 of these gems.

    --
    There was an unknown error in the submission.
  18. GLQuake? by twazzock · · Score: 2, Funny

    GLQuake still runs fine on my shiny new nVidia, and at crazy resolutions and frame rates :) OpenGL written applications have a tendancy to work forever anyway, (unlike a certain other API we all know *cough* DirectX *cough*) at least graphically.
    There's got to be a better game example for this.

    I hope my old Voodoo hasn't been thrown out. Like to see it in action ;)

    1. Re:GLQuake? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OpenGL written applications have a tendancy to work forever anyway, (unlike a certain other API we all know *cough* DirectX *cough*) at least graphically.

      Very true. I recently ported some OpenGL code from a medical imaging system originally developed in 1992 and 1993. I was surprised at how easy it was to just take the code from Irix 4.0.4, and basically recompile it on FreeBSD 6.1. It took far more effort to get the non-OpenGL code ported over and updated than it took to port over the OpenGL-related code.

    2. Re:GLQuake? by archen · · Score: 1

      DirectX is another nail in the coffin for why I gave up on PC gaming. The vast majority of games I bought don't work on my newer PCs. I bought the "updated" version of Tie Fighter but never got around playing it until 2 months ago - but couldn't get it to work because it DEMANDS DirectX6 and no other version. Strangely enough the Dos version still works fine...

      I guess with the modern buy and toss in 2 months game cycle that's popular now it isn't much of a concern to most people, but I often like to revisit my favorite games. At least with a console I can keep it and play it if I REALLY want to, but keeping around a special PC? ...

  19. Re:Daryl Strauss would be proud by speculatrix · · Score: 1

    I have an SB Live!Value! card fitted with S/PDIF adaptor from Hoontech; installed in my mp3 jukebox, it works brilliantly with my home cinema system. It took a lot of pain to get the right driver installed which correctly enabled the s/pdif connectors, so I am wondering whether it'd ever work if I upgraded to XP or MCE, I am guessing not, from your comment.

  20. Security issues by ledow · · Score: 3, Informative

    I think the main focus of the article should really be the poor driver design and the huge security problems.

    Two services, both of which are running as privileged users, which directly map memory and IO space to a user-space process without any significant checks being done on what is asking for access or what it's asking for access to in a common driver running under a networked OS.

    You might say why have a glide card in a server but just how many drivers for other hardware use this same sort of rubbish to interface to their hardware without us knowing? How many still do it under XP, 2003, Vista etc.?

    Every time you install a device driver you are really granting complete machine access to the driver, without audit, without checks. Even in XP x64, he's shown that the ability to create such a driver (one that has privileged access and will grant it to any software that asks for it) requires only a trivial re-compile of a badly-designed driver, using publically available source code, and an install.

    Have people known about this particular driver issue for a long time? Although deliberately introducing malware onto a system via this method would of course require the administrators co-operation, how many third-party device drivers, services, etc. can be subverted to provide that level of access to any software that asks for it?

    That's the scary bit - the fact that the author must be a bit mental to want to run a VooDoo on an XP x64 machine is re-assuring in comparison.

    1. Re:Security issues by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Two services, both of which are running as privileged users, which directly map memory and IO space to a user-space process without any significant checks being done on what is asking for access or what it's asking for access to in a common driver running under a networked OS.

      Dude, it's even worse than that! Did you know that the Windows kernel talks directly to the CPU? They haven't even attempted to put an abstraction layer between them!

      And the situation is no better under Linux either. Users of Intel Macs are alright as long as they are careful to run only PPC code. In that case they are protected by Rosetta which recognises evil instructions and replaces them with NOPs before they do any damage.

  21. the good old days by luther349 · · Score: 0

    voodoo cards owned everything. yes it was a fact they didnt use bleeding edge hardware but to make up for it the cards where so dammed fast the first to support linking rember the 2x vodoo 2 setup we all loved. not to metion 3dfx glide made opengl seem slow. it was a sad day when they died.

    1. Re:the good old days by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Glide was a dedicated gaming API, specifically tailored to the voodoo hardware...
      OpenGL on the other hand, is a more general purpose graphics API designed to run on a wide range of hardware, and is designed for quality rather than gaming performance.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  22. wrong: designed for speed, not eyecandy. by Tei · · Score: 1

    Quake whas not designed for OpenGL, and the initial graphics cards where a quality decrease. Whas speed that whas much better.
    Nowdays the GPU also enhance eyecandy, so GPU based games can look better, but the first cards where design for speed.

    Imho, the first Quake2 screens look like crap because of that, designed for crappy 3d graphic accelerators. Even the mp2 format is "liquid" so render like crap.

    --

    -Woof woof woof!

    1. Re:wrong: designed for speed, not eyecandy. by lendude · · Score: 1
      Huh? - the initial 3D graphics cards were a (visual I presume) "quality decrease" in Quake???


      Yeh, coz that software rendering at 320 x 200 in q95.bat really kicked arse eyecandy-wise!

      --
      "Get off the cross - we need the wood" - Tori Amos
    2. Re:wrong: designed for speed, not eyecandy. by CaseyB · · Score: 1

      Um, no. GLQuake looked better in every respect than software rendering. Higher resolution, higher framerate, and 16 bit color. Some folks complained about the "blurriness" of bilinear texture interpolation, but that was only because they hadn't realized that it was better yet. :)

    3. Re:wrong: designed for speed, not eyecandy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One could run Quake I in software mode a decent resolution (1024x768) ... if you had Pentium Pro CPU. I doubt there was a "decrease", but if you had the right computer, you didn't need a Voodoo to play Quake.

  23. Voodoo power by raulfragoso · · Score: 1

    I'm really convinced that this guy have invoked the true malevolent power of voodoo forces to achieve such insane act - the word "Windows" in the title has no pertinence to my declaration.

  24. Re:Daryl Strauss would be proud by Mad+Merlin · · Score: 1

    Linux's 3dfx driver has supported x86, amd64, sparc, alpha, ia64, ppc, and more for quite awhile.

  25. Voodoo5 by loki.TJ · · Score: 1

    I just got done moving and was unpacking my "computer parts" box and found that I still have a Voodoo 5. Time to put it in my new gaming rig and fire that baby up.

  26. 3dfx lost their way by Namarrgon · · Score: 4, Interesting

    32bit colour and T&L may not have set the world on fire when they were released, but that's hardly surprising. Since the hardware was new, no software yet took full advantage of them.

    It's different today. Try running modern games without T&L today, even on a modern CPU, and watch your game crawl - if it plays at all. And see if you can get a gamer to play in 16 bit without noticing the difference (and complaining). The TNT and GeForce chips set the scene for modern graphics, just like the Voodoo & Voodoo 2 did in their time with real 3D acceleration, dedicated texture units, SLI etc.

    3dfx made many mistakes, which resulted in them simply being out-innovated and out-executed by the competition while they struggled with their consequences of their poor business decisions. They showed the way, but Voodoo 5/6's multichip approach was never the right direction for the mainstream future.

    --
    Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
    1. Re:3dfx lost their way by mdarksbane · · Score: 1

      Although I still wish someone else would implement 16 bit color without making it look like crap. Unreal was beautiful on a Voodoo3, even in 16-bit. 16bit even on my new card looks grainy and nasty.

      It really kind of sucks for old games :(

    2. Re:3dfx lost their way by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1
      I seem to recall that the thing that started the death of 3dfx was bump mapping. The TNT supported it, and it made a huge difference to how games looked. A friend of mine had one, and games which supported it looked much better at 1024x768 with bump mapping than they did at 800x600 without (which was the best my VooDoo 2 could support). The VooDoo 3 was an anticlimax; not sufficiently better than the 2 to be worth the upgrade, and the other cards needed insane amounts of power.

      When the GeForce was released with TnL, suddenly games looked much better on a P200 with a GPU than a K6-2 400 with any 3dfx card.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    3. Re:3dfx lost their way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At the ridiculous resolutions of today 16-bits with dithering would actually be fine for colour alone, but there's this little thing called alpha..

    4. Re:3dfx lost their way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bump mapping came with the Matrox G400, Nvidia got it only on the first GeForce I think.

  27. Re:Daryl Strauss would be proud by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

    Yeah, but I never quite could get the Voodoo 3500 TV driver working correctly on a 2.6 kernel. I got it working a bit on the 2.4 kernel, but it was still a little buggy. There may be support in Linux for popular hardware, but things like the voodoo 3500 are the reason I still think it would all be so much better if manufacturers released open source drivers. At least then the community could fix this stuff when the manufacturer lost interest.

    --

    Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
  28. Re:Daryl Strauss would be proud by RESPAWN · · Score: 1

    I'm with you on this one. I see no real tangible benefit to upgrade from a Live! sound card. Most of the latest advances in sound card technology concern new technologies that, in the grand scheme of things, don't matter for s**t if you don't play games. And even if you do, an SB Live! is still good enough unless you want/have more than 4 speakers. I don't really care about these 3d sound effects, but maybe I don't yet know what I'm missing out on.

    For the record, I also still have a Voodoo 3 3000 PCI that I use for a secondary display on my P4 rig. Again, I guess I could go out and buy a newer PCI card to use for a second display, but if my old one works, why should I? It's nice to know that should I ever upgrade to an x64 rig, I can still take my dual monitor goodness with me.

    --

    If Murphy's Law can go wrong, it will.

  29. Voodoo3 3500 with TV in/out by Dareth · · Score: 1

    Best damn video card ever! Did I say EVA! Yeah I said best damn card ever....
    I got mine when it was cheap and affordable. Unreal Tournament looked awesome and so did my Linux Desktop!

    Who else remembers the "Don't worry we will support your Voodoo cards"... Next day... Site not found!

    --

    I only look human.
    My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
  30. It's a bit of a cult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's a strange following for the Voodoo series, probably because it's such an iconic brand. There's dozens of custom drivers for the cards - and not just for PCs and Macs (what's a linux?, but for the Amiga, and they managed to get Doom3 working on couple of Voodoo 2 cards in SLi. I wish other cards and brands had this kind of a following, where they bang the most out of the anitquated graphics cards, would be nice to have a community for Matrox Gxxx users or the ti4xxx users

  31. Amiga drivers? by Bert64 · · Score: 1

    Someone on the linked forum made a joke about Amiga drivers for the voodoo boards...
    They're even still being sold!
    http://www.vesalia.de/e_mediator.htm

    --
    http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  32. non-passthrought? by CaptnMArk · · Score: 1

    Does voodoo(2) work as an extra PCI card, for "triple-head" ?

    or does it only work in passtrough mode?

    1. Re:non-passthrought? by Khyber · · Score: 1

      The Voodoo2 was a 3-d only card. It's successor, the Banshee, allowed for 2d acceleration as well. So the answer is it was still just a pass-thru card. But what kicked ass was you could link 4 voodoo 2's together and destroy nearly any game made back then. At least nVidia took a page from that notebook and implemented it somewhat properly to match today's hardware, though I'm wondering why they never implemented SLI and brought about dual-AGP slot boards. Just for shits, I do have a Voodoo2 in this computer, running right alongside my GeForce 6200. The Voodoo2 was great in that it could use memory from other graphics cards. It's funny to run GLQuake and see 268 megs of memory pop up on the console while loading.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    2. Re:non-passthrought? by qa'lth · · Score: 1

      Actually, there were very beta drivers released by 3dfx that could do this. Also, I believe there's a howto out there to get X11 to treat it as a 2d framebuffer, too.

    3. Re:non-passthrought? by default+luser · · Score: 1

      But what kicked ass was you could link 4 voodoo 2's together and destroy nearly any game made back then

      Somebody has a bad memory. You can link TWO (2) Voodoo 2 cards together in SLI. It is possible to link more together, as 3DFX did in their arcade boards, but this requires custom glue logic.

      The Voodoo2 was great in that it could use memory from other graphics cards. It's funny to run GLQuake and see 268 megs of memory pop up on the console while loading.


      That's just not true. The only successful card to use memory from other graphics cards was the PowerVR. The card had onboard memory, but this was simply a texture cache. The chip processed tiles using the on-chip tile cache, and after a tile was rendered it was transfered via PCI bus to your 2D card's framebuffer.

      If GL Quake is reporting the combined framebuffer size, that's a bug in Quake, or it is being misreported by Windows.

      --

      Man is the animal that laughs.
      And occasionally whores for Karma.

  33. Re:Daryl Strauss would be proud by friedmud · · Score: 1

    As for working with Vista RC1... try just installing the Windows XP drivers.... it works for my Live! 24-bit! (The vista drivers creative puts out worked in Beta2... but stopped working in RC1 for me... so I had to search for solutions)

    Also note that there is a lively Vista forum for creative labs owners over here:

    http://forums.creative.com/creativelabs/board?boar d.id=Vista

    Friedmud

  34. Re:Daryl Strauss would be proud by Bert64 · · Score: 1

    I also have an original SBLive card, which works perfectly under 64bit linux, but none of the 64bit versions of windows seem to support it... It also works on 64bit linux on a 64bit alphastation.
    I have the same issue with old tulip 10/100 network cards, no 64bit windows supports them, even tho the cards were designed for 64bit machines, and are well supported by tru64 and openvms on the alpha.

    --
    http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  35. Re:Daryl Strauss would be proud by Bert64 · · Score: 1

    That's still 1 1/2 years, assuming no owners of voodoo cards had access to any of the beta released of xp x64 to begin porting the driver...
    What's worse tho, is that 64bit windows is over 10 years behind the first 64bit OS, despite running (in a limited fashion, not taking advantage of 64bit features) on 64bit hardware since early releases of NT (mips, alpha etc)

    --
    http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  36. Re:Daryl Strauss would be proud by Ash+Vince · · Score: 1

    Que?

    Knock Knock Knock, anybody home?

    I remember my old voodoo2 card with some fondness, it worked fine for every 3d game I used it for at 800*600 which was the only resolution my monitor would do non-interlaced. I had no intention of replacing my monitor as I was a poor student at the time with no dosh.

    Then along comes that glorious peice of crap that was windows XP. Now all of a sudden my voodoo2 is unsupported. Not by my games mind you, I want to carry on playing the same games i have been without putting up with having to reinstall the OS periodically because windows used to require this every once in while (Windows ME and Windows 95SE were both awful in this regard). But althought windows XP improved on the stability front and no longer required reinstalling once a month it did stop supporting (IE - no drivers available for) the Voodoo2.

    So I have to go out and spend a fortune on new hardware which ended up giving me very little in thw wae of a performance boost. Now being that this happened what morons moderated the above article as interesting? It seems the author is unaware that you may wish to upgrade your operating system but then run exactly the same software you were beforehand, possibly because no new software is available that has been written for that OS until a few months after the main OS release.

    You still want the new OS however because the old OS was a buggy, unreliable piece of crap that should never have been given away let alone sold. I am convinced the only reason we have a decent version of Windows at present (XP) is because of Linux. You only need to go back and look at past Microsoft performance when they had a complete monopoly, they stopped not only innovating, but also paying any attention to quality control either. If anyone else doesnt remember how bad windows ME was then lucky you, as I was misfortunate enough to pay for a legal, off the shelf copy. It was the main thing that convinced me to switch to Linux I felt wholeheartedly ripped off for paying for something that did not work.

    Basically, the parent posted might be right if not for that fact that 8 years ago, the underlying windows OS was totally useless and did not even run well on hardware from the same period. That same hardware could be much better utilised by windows XP as this was specifically written for alot of this same hardware, except voodoo2 graphics cards if u were unfortunate enough to own one as 3DFX has by then been bought by nvidia (or ati maybe, i forget) and the new owners wanted to bankrupt the company.

    --
    I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
  37. Re:Daryl Strauss would be proud by Panaflex · · Score: 1

    Hey, I'm proud! I worked with Daryl on the 64bit Alpha port of the Voodoo drivers to X windows. (Of course running on the Alpha Linux) I had been on a mission to lobby 3dfx to release the drivers - and wow was I surprised when they actually did.

    -Pan

    --
    I said no... but I missed and it came out yes.
  38. Re:Daryl Strauss would be proud by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Granted, in practice using old devices and drivers mostly makes sense for external peripherals, like printers, scanners, etc. If you want a new computer to enjoy new games, or to speed up compilation, there's really no point in upgrading all your peripherals as well. There are also some internal cards that you don't want to upgrade every time you change computers, for example a TV/radio card or a SCSI card that you only use for an old SCSI scanner.

  39. Re:Daryl Strauss would be proud by neo8750 · · Score: 1
    Lucky you.

    I went out and bought the Live card. I had it for 1 week and the card fried. Creative told me to send it in and when i did they claimed that it was not a defective or damaged and it should work (it still smelled like smoke) and they sent it back saying it was fine and refusing to fix it even after hours of phone conversations. And yes i tried it in other systems (about 15 or so before i gave up on it).

    I guess i just got a lemon.

  40. Re:Daryl Strauss would be proud by jandrese · · Score: 1

    Wait, you're saying that you "spent a fortune" on a new graphics card because XP wasn't supporting your Voodoo 2 and you're saying you didn't get much of a performance boost? If you were only doing 2D Raster stuff, why did you buy such an expensive card? You could have picked up a well supported older model low end Geforce for almost nothing instead, and it still would have been quite a bit faster than your old Voodoo for 3D work.

    --

    I read the internet for the articles.
  41. Why? by Ayanami+Rei · · Score: 1

    16-bit is a joke.
    You can't do reasonable color blending and lighting with 16-bits of output colorspace.
    Supporting 16-bit textures to save space is different, but the pipeline needs to at least be 8-bits wide per channel (10, or better yet 16-bits is preferred).

    --
    THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
  42. WTF Are you talking about? by Khyber · · Score: 1

    They showed the way, but Voodoo 5/6's multichip approach was never the right direction for the mainstream future.

    The Voodoo 2 Did the multi-chip approach LONG before voodoo 5's were around, and it WAS the solution and direction to create the future of graphics that we have right now. The 12 meg Creative 3D Blaster Voodoo2 had three processors on board, and it BEAT THE SHIT OUT OF EVERY OTHER CARD ON THE MARKET. What kind of nonsense are you spouting?

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    1. Re:WTF Are you talking about? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Get real. Those three chips on the Voodoo 2 were one "pixelFX" rasteriser and two "texelFX" texture mapping units, together resulting in a single pixel pipeline capable of dual texturing -- whereas Nvidia's Riva TNT had two single-texturing pipelines (which could combine into dual-texturing) plus a 2D core on a single chip, not three.

      Voodoo 2 was capable of two-card SLI for what "multi-chip" typically refers to. (You wouldn't call a multi-chip IBM RS-series processor "multi-processor" when it was a single logical processor, now would you?) It was the Voodoo 5 that introduced "multi-chip" rendering on a single card.

      True, Voodoo 2 ruled, but after the TNT series only in the SLI configuration, or otherwise only because Glide was still popular among game devs... not because of any technical excellence of the chips or the card. They needed three chips to have less than what Nvidia managed to squeeze on a single-chip solution.

      And to answer a post somewhere above [I'm too lazy to wait for another submitting window], the STB purchase affected 3dfx's downfall (as it pissed off every single third party board maker, who promptly hopped over to Nvidia's camp instead, and also because STB's old board plant at Juarez was a never-ending source of problems), but so did the incredible feature creep of the Rampage project -- originaly slated as a successor to Voodoo Graphics already! -- and the jaw-dropping way 3dfx bled money on stuff completely unrelated to chips, drivers, or retail. All the while Nvidia recovered from the NV1 and NV2 disasters (quads as rendering primitives, anyone?) to constantly come up with improved products (even if the famed "6 month product cycle" never quite happened) to gradually win almost all the third party video card makers. The rest is history -- Nvidia bought out 3dfx and buried the projects, bar the jittered sub-pixel sampling method maybe...

  43. It was the TNT2, not the original TNT. by Ayanami+Rei · · Score: 1

    The difference between the Voodoo 1 series and the TNT was debatable.
    The TNT2 wiped the floor with most of the Voodoo cards (and was on par with a Voodoo 3).

    Although my card of choice was a 3DLabs Permedia 3. I was lucky enough to get one. If the game supported OpenGL, it flew. I remember playing Quake II and Unreal and thinking how much cooler it was than the STB Velocity I used to have. Also it was the only card that played the ports of FFVII and FFVIII with any stability in Windows 98.

    --
    THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
  44. why is this modded funny by Brigadier · · Score: 1



    I was thinking the same thing. When I had my Dual Voodoo2 SLI set up I was king of the hill playing unreal tournement in 1024x768 mode.

  45. Welcome to 1998 by operagost · · Score: 1

    Matrox Millennium + Voodoo 2 SLI = the best

    --

    Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
  46. Re:Daryl Strauss would be proud by DDLKermit007 · · Score: 1

    Just goes to show you. 3dfx fanboys are worse than any other out there. Some still think the Voodoo 5 is the best card ever.

  47. And what's that got to do with anything? by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 3, Informative

    He's right that when the Voodoo 5 came out, multi-chip was not the way to go. It was too expensive and their chips were too slow. A single chip GeForce 2 beat the Voodoos soundly on non-T&L games and annihilated them on ones that did use it. The proof would be in the fact that 3dfx fell from the preeminent 3D company down to something nVidia bought up.

    Also the Voodoo 2 didn't have 3 processors on board, it had 3 chips each which was a part of a single unit. One chip did the frame buffer, the two others were texture units. Together they formed what is a single pipeline on a modern card. While separate chips, you had to have one frame buffer chip and at least one texture chip. Adding more texture chips made multi-texturing faster, but not single texturing. In no case did it help geometry.

    The Voodoo 5 was different. Each VSA was it's own self contained chip. You could use one or you could use more. However they weren't very powerful. It took 2 of them to make a showing at all against things like a GeForce, never mind a GeForce 2. That was not the right way to go. More chips is a valid in visualization systems (which 3dfx chips were oft used in) but not for consumer desktops. As is seen with the SLI market there IS a small market for it for the ubergamers, but it's got to be optional, not mandatory to get reasonable performance.

  48. Multichip is expensive by default+luser · · Score: 2, Informative

    3DFX was the last holdout on combining all their chips into a single core logic for mainstream product lines.

    Example: in 1996 when 3dlabs designed the Permedia, it was a multi-chip solution (just like their workstation products) consisting of a pixel and vertex processor. In 1997, 3dlabs combined the multi-chip Permedia into the single-chip Permedia 2. Despite being priced mucn cheaper than the Permedia, the Permedia 2 made 3dlabs much more money due to the low-cost, single-chip design.

    3DFX designed the Voodoo Graphics as a multi-chip solution (just like their arcade boards), and they were high-priced due to the cost of a multi-chip solution. Even worse were the Voodoo Rush cards, which required 3 chips, and didn't work properly. 3DFX raised that cost even higher with the Voodoo 2, which required THREE chips for a 3D-only solution. They also increased the PCB complexity by requiring THREE 64-bit independent busses.

    What they should have done after the Voodoo Graphics got them recognition was release something like the Voodoo 3 (with reduced clocks), but they put that off in favor of the Voodoo 2 because they could release it earlier. Later, they released the cut-down Banshee, and they made the mistake of marketing it (and pricing it) as a performance product, instead of a midrange part designed to entice OEMs.

    Near the end of the year, other competitors released chips that were much better than single Voodoo 2 cards for the same price. The Banshee barely kept up in the price war with the TNT and Savage 3D, and the Voodoo2's price plummeted as a result of that price war. The market for Voodoo 2 cards saturated, and because 3DFX had no way to reduce the build cost (thanks to their multi-chip design), they took losses.

    So, by the end of 1998, consumers were left confused by all the inconsistency. All 3DFX fans had to purchase were overpriced Voodoo 2 cards that required a 2D card, and all they had to look forward to was the Voodoo 3 (same performance as Voodoo 2 SLI, 6 months down the road, big deal). The only impressive card 3DFX released in 1998 was the Voodoo 2, but it was only impressive for the first half of the year. 3dFX never saw the "big picture" that was the single-chip 2D/3D card until it was too late.

    --

    Man is the animal that laughs.
    And occasionally whores for Karma.

    1. Re:Multichip is expensive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A bit late to the party but here goes anyway...

      You are forgetting that Voodoo 2, Voodoo 3 ("Avenger"), and Voodoo 4/5 ("Napalm") were all just stopgap solutions. The real plan was the mighty "Rampage", a single-chip 2D/3D solution, envisaged as a successor to the original Voodoo Graphics. Needelss to say, features were creeping more than Glaze3D and nothing ever materialized.

      They also had further plans for a "FEAR" board with a "SAGE" T&L chip accompanied by one or two Rampages; after that, they planned "Hydra", a new rasterizer also designed for multi-chip, which morphed into "Fusion" (in their plans) after they aquired Gigapixel Corp's deferred tile-based rendering technology. Aftre that a further product was "Mojo" of which nobody seems to know even a vague plan, but supposedly it was to be a pure DTBR monster...

      So, 3Dfx *did* have the single-chip idea in mind early on. But... Nevermind the other 3dfx daydreams, Rampage already makes Duke Nukem Forever look like a well-managed project.

  49. Cool but useless by hurfy · · Score: 1

    Wait that defines half my life....

    hehe, I might actually try and slap something together.

    Love this kind of stuff ever since i found out XP does NOT support the old tape drives off the floppy port for no particular reason. I was convinced it should work so i set about finding a driver(s). Eventually i got a combonation that worked! Then i decided to scrap it as too slow after days of fussing with it. But damnit I wanted to make that choice NOT MS :)

  50. Re:Daryl Strauss would be proud by imboboage0 · · Score: 1

    If you aren't an audiophile or a gamer, there is very little reason to need anything past a Live! card. I have been the owner of two Sound Blasters, an Audigy, and more recently, an X-Fi. I love my X-Fi. However, I play tons of games and listen to a lot of music. Now, I have been very satisfied with the XP drivers. They work great, have great adjustment options, etc. I recently tried out Vista RC1 and was very disappointed. For one, the drivers had no EAX support. EAX does wonders in games, and now I didn't have that. Strike one. Next, the interface had been jacked up. It is no longer easy to use or friendly, but it does have this nice feature of not saving my settings. Strike two. Finally, CMSS-3D wasn't functional. This basically up-mixes all sound to 5.1 so I actually feel 'surrounded' by my music. I listen to music whenever I'm not gaming, so that about killed it for me. So far, I have had pretty good luck with Creative's drivers, but this is an exception. I will give a little credit, as the OS isn't completely supported by much of anyone yet. All that aside, I think they need to re-work their driver system. There are so many different varieties of the Live! card it can be impossible to find your drivers. I think they would do better to have a base 'control panel' and allow you to download a 'unified driver' package like nVIDIA does. This way, there would be no confusion and this single 'Live! Unified Driver' package would have everything you need, no matter which card you have.

    --
    Honesty may be the best policy, but by process of elimination, dishonesty is the second best policy.
  51. Antialiasing still better than today's cards by _Shorty-dammit · · Score: 1

    I don't think the Voodoo 5 is the best card ever, but the antialiasing it did is still better than everyone else's to this very day. Granted, it was pretty slow, since it rendered each frame literally four times from start to finish without taking any shortcuts. But it looked gorgeous. Even something like an NVIDIA SLI rig today only matches the Voodoo 5's 2x AA mode in some ways, and it shows. The Voodoo 5 and 4x AA still spoils me to this day. Sure, all the cards that have some since then have gone leaps and bounds beyond what it ever did in every other way. But AA still sucks today on the very newest cards in comparison. And unless you've actually played games for any length of time with a Voodoo 5 it is hard to imagine. To this very day there are people that argue that AA isn't very important, and lots of people don't even use it because it doesn't help that much in their opinion. Knowing that they never saw a V5's AA, I can totally understand their opinion. Doesn't matter that cards have been more than fast enough to do V5-style AA for years now, or that NVIDIA even owns the 3dfx IP that contains their AA method, we still get crap AA anyways. All the other advancements, I'd never give up. Cards are so good today, and keep getting better and better. It rocks. But I still wish I could have actual good AA. When you can run a game a 10x a usable framerate, it definitely would not hurt to fully render each frame four times to get good AA. And, no, their multi-sample modes are not quite the same as the V5's method. They're obviously doing something different. Their shortcuts, etc, are giving results far different from what you would see with a V5. Now they introduce features such as transparency AA, which just makes me laugh. OK, you've introduced a solution to a problem that wouldn't even exist in the first place if you were doing AA properly to begin with. Thanks. Next time, just do AA properly from the get-go. No excuse for not doing so. Especially when you bought the good method's technology from the competitor you killed off, hehe.

    1. Re:Antialiasing still better than today's cards by DDLKermit007 · · Score: 1

      Never made the statement that I haven't owned/used a Voodoo5. I used to be a hge 3dfx zelot back in the day starting with the Vodoo that Intergraph first made up through the Voodoo 5. I was impressed with the AA it did & such, but it's far eaisier/better to just pump 4x the pixles than AA how they were doing it. I knew I'd get a Voodoo fanboy reply though. They always come out of the woodwork. I could honestly care what companies live & die as long as they are a benifit for the industry without being insainely priced which manufacturers are doing allot more now.

    2. Re:Antialiasing still better than today's cards by _Shorty-dammit · · Score: 1

      I never said anything about you. I was talking about things in general. I'm no fanboy, of any company. When something's better, it's better, period. I stuck with Intel for years and years, until AMD finally bested them. And now I've stuck with AMD for a few years. Not sure what my next purchase will be, AMD or Intel, because they're kind of see-sawing right now. Intel's better today, but I don't know if that will hold true by the time I upgrade again. We'll see. Same goes for NVIDIA and ATI. Couldn't care less who makes it. As long as it works as intended, and is fast. Last purchase was NVIDIA, but this was quite a while ago. Almost bought an ATI somewhat recently, but I think it's swinging back to NVIDIA again. And I think you're misunderstanding how AA is being done. It's not simply about pumping 4x the pixels, because that's exactly what 3dfx did. It's *how* you do it that is important. Somehow, even with the technical documents in their hands, I don't think NVIDIA quite gets what the difference is between how they do it and how 3dfx did it, even thought 3dfx explained it to death when they were bringing it out.