Graphiccards overview

[hiostu]

At area3d.net we have been working on a fullscale chipoverview for a lot of 3d cards. The overview contains a lot of information for people who are interested in buying a 3d card and want some clear information.

There is also a comment/rating part of the overview where people can rate the cards.

The overview isn't final yet, but I was wondering to what categories you can rate a card (for usual users).

The overview can be found here:
http://www.area3d.net/overview.php

P.S. I hope this isn't considered spam, if it is please delete this thread.
P.S.2 If there is any incorrect data in the overview please tell us.

We just want an overview that is correct and clear for the users.

 

[Dio]

I still don't like the 'pipeline' and 'number of TMU's' term. The latter term in particular is specifically 3dfx-only. 'Textures per pixel per clock' is a better term.

Savage3D and Savage4 are missing.

 

[hiostu]

I understand, that might be a better name if TMU is something 3dfx specific.


But what about the ratings, should there be more, others? Or more numbers?

 

[Arun]

What about never-were GPUs? Don't wanna put them in? There's Rampage, and a few others I believe

Heck, you might even put the "original NV30 design" in there, considering how god darn different it is from the resulting product...

Oh, and I disagree on the "per pixel" thing, Dio.
"Textures per clock" is more appropriate. Because remember that in the future, you'll have those thingies ( since we can't call them TMUs, lol ) in the VS too. And they're likely to be shared.

Oh, and if you intent to keep this page updated in the future, you may wish not to be required to put something in the pipeline column ( Anyone who knows what I believe will know what I'm hinting at, eh )


Uttar

 

[hiostu]

the pixel things have been accounted for. But that will be really changed when needed.

But what about the ratings?

I'll put the categories here for those who can't see them:

Performance:
Features:
Stability:
Drivers:

All scores have a scale from 1 to 5

 

[Dio]

Oh, and I disagree on the "per pixel" thing, Dio.
"Textures per clock" is more appropriate. Because remember that in the future, you'll have those thingies ( since we can't call them TMUs, lol ) in the VS too. And they're likely to be shared.

Like I said - both are outdated measures. It's just a measure of some particular bottleneck. 'Peak pixels per clock' and 'simultaneous textures when running at peak pixels per clock' might be appropriate. But even that could be meaningless depending on what the costs of trilinear, anisotropic, etc. are...

 

[CI]

3dfx500 chip for the 3dfx Velocity
VSA101 daytona (did it made it to the market?)

How about older chips like ATi Rage series, Intel i740, Matrox Gx00, etc?

 

[hiostu]

How about older chips like ATi Rage series, Intel i740, Matrox Gx00, etc?

We'll try to add those as soon as possible. We're first trying to reach a consensus over the rating system. And we're currently updating the nvidia chips followed by the ATI ones. And working our way down the list.

 

[Randell]

the pixel things have been accounted for. But that will be really changed when needed.

But what about the ratings?

I'll put the categories here for those who can't see them:

Performance:
Features:
Stability:
Drivers:

All scores have a scale from 1 to 5

for its timescale I assume?

 

[hiostu]

that was indeed something I was worying about. What to do with older cards. I mean if they are just out they can have a performance level of 5, but what about a year later.

So maybe no performance rating (it is a bit trivial anyway). But more for quality or something like that.

2d visual quality? (but this might change)
3d visual quality? (might change also)

user friendliness?

What would the average/intermediate buyer want to see for ratings.

 

[Pete]

You'll just have to specify a timeframe for the scores, like either at release or six months later (to allow the drivers to catch up to the hardware). For instance, the GF3 and 8500 both proved faster with later drivers. The other problem is, will you determine performance as an aggregate of plain + AA + AF + AA+AF? It's tricky.

 

[swaaye]

You should list the G400 (1x2, .18u), G450 (1x2, ,18u), and G550. Those chips are different, with the G550 being a .18u 2x2 design I believe, with some T&L.

Why not list the G200 and G250 as well, both are 1x1. G200 is .35u, G250 is .25u. (I think, it may have been .25 down to .18)

 

[ZenBearClaw!]

Radeon error...
I thought tho someone could correct me that all of the radeon cards had T&L support though the 9200 is marked as not having it on the sub-page. Educate me if i'm wrong.

 

[hiostu]

Ok I made some changes to the rating system. I added an overall rating which is also displayed on the main page. The performance rating will stay this way. But a text will be made to make clear it was a rating for the cards timeframe.

BTW thanx for the heads up on the radeons. And we'll try to add the matroxes as soon as possible. So much info to collect so little time

 

[Neeyik]

Radeon error...
I thought tho someone could correct me that all of the radeon cards had T&L support though the 9200 is marked as not having it on the sub-page. Educate me if i'm wrong.

Radeon VEs and 7000s do not have hardware vertex processing (aka TnL).

 

[hiostu]

9200 changed (no tnl for 7200 + VE)

Savages updated

added Rage Fury Maxx

 

[swaaye]

Matrox G400 125Mhz 166Mhz 9 million .18u 1x2 150MPixels/S 300MTexels/s 16-32MB 2.65GB/s

Matrox G400MAX 166Mhz 200Mhz 9 million .18u 1x2 160MP/s 320MT/s 32MB 3.2GB/s

Matrox G200 100MHz 143Mhz SD ? million .25u 1x1 100MP/s 100MT/s 8-16MB 1.14GB/s

Matrox Mill G200 100MHz 143MHz SG ? million .25u 1x1 100MP/s 100MT/s 8-16MB 1.14GB/s


lol here we go

Rendition V2200 60MHz 100Mhz ? million .35u(?) 1x1 60MP/s 60MT/s 4-8MB 480MB/s

Rendition V2100 45MHz 100MHz ? million .35u(?) 1x1 45MP/s 45MT/s 4MB 480MB/s

Rendition V1000 40Mhz 40MHz ? million .5u(?) 1x1 45MP/s 45MT/s 4MB 320MB/s (EDO too)

A Sierra Screamin' 3D - One of the first V1000s

A Diamond Stealth S220 - One of the only V2100 boards

And, a nifty Quantum3D Obsidian 100SB Voodoo1 SLI


We need a video card picture page!!!!!!

 

[AzBat]

A picture page would be cool. In fact, I've got a lot of the older ones that I could take a photo of. Unfortunately finding the time to do it would be hard. Also been thinking of selling them on eBay to help pay my old Dimension3D.com bill. That would allow me to at least sell or lease my domain name.

Tommy McClain

 

[swaaye]

I have a good collection of cards going too.

Somebody set up some hosting space and The PC Card Picture Page (TPCCPP) will begin development!

Could have a sound card picture page too considering how many nifty cards there have been over the years.....

 

[Simon F]

A picture page would be cool. In fact, I've got a lot of the older ones that I could take a photo of. Unfortunately finding the time to do it would be hard. Also been thinking of selling them on eBay to help pay my old Dimension3D.com bill. That would allow me to at least sell or lease my domain name.

Tommy McClain

I have a stack of pictures of some unusual cards - maybe one day I'll permission to publish them.