Which video card to you use?

Lehm · Post by **Lehm** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 5:07 pm

Just curious what video cards are used to run d2x.

Riot · Post by **Riot** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 5:10 pm

Radeon 9600 Pro

1ACE1 · Post by **1ACE1** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 5:16 pm

9600 pro, and its on steroids.

Nosferatu · Post by **Nosferatu** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 5:52 pm

D2 doesnt take much at all in the line of horse power by todays standards. You could probably us a GF2.

My computer has a GF4 Ti 4200.

Lehm · Post by **Lehm** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 5:55 pm

Nosferatu wrote:D2 doesnt take much at all in the line of horse power by todays standards. You could probably us a GF2.

Currently that is...

1ACE1 · Post by **1ACE1** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 7:37 pm

Practically anything you can find these days will run d2 like a champ lol.

MD-2389 · Post by **MD-2389** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 7:45 pm

PNY GF4 Ti4600

Duper · Post by **Duper** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 8:17 pm

XFX 6600GT

Best bang for your buck!

pATCheS · Post by **pATCheS** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 8:56 pm

9800 Pro 128mb and running happily and silently, thanks to Zalman

Grendel · Post by **Grendel** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 9:45 pm

Duper wrote:XFX 6600GT

Best bang for your buck!

BFG 6800 Ultra OC -- $350 after rebate..

Besides that, a Gainward 2600 GS (6800 Ultra), a Gainward 1800 GS (5950) and a Ti4600 -- too many comps I guess

Duper · Post by **Duper** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 9:50 pm

I ment lower bucks. good lord dude. AFTER REBATE???

yeeshh.. not ALL of us are engineers.

kurupt · Post by **kurupt** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 10:41 pm

9800 pro

Tyranny · Post by **Tyranny** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 11:12 pm

FX5200

Sirius · Post by **Sirius** » Thu Jun 02, 2005 12:04 am

Okay...

What video card is better for D2x? Neither, because D2x comes in at the 'below the lowest common denominator' level in graphical features. There's nothing in it that either main vendor's cards won't run well.

Personally, I run it on a Radeon 7500, though, and get quite respectable framerates (capped at 80, and it's slammed hard against that at 1024x768 if I remember rightly).

However, I've actually had D2x running on an SiS 930 under OpenGL and still got about 20-30 fps. It's not really a concern.

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Thu Jun 02, 2005 1:36 am

9800pro with a custom heatsink I milled.

Diedel · Post by **Diedel** » Thu Jun 02, 2005 3:26 pm

Sirius,

Lehm is doing this poll because he is currently working on getting pixel shaders in D2X-W32 to run ... /me thinks.

You will have a hard time running pixel shaders on a SiS chipset with internal graphics.

Btw, I have D2X-W32 running on a GF 5200 FX and a GF 2 MX400, too.

Jeff250 · Post by **Jeff250** » Thu Jun 02, 2005 3:29 pm

Geforce 5950 Ultra

Motorman! · Post by **Motorman!** » Thu Jun 02, 2005 6:38 pm

Another vote for Geforce...6600 GT here.

Lehm · Post by **Lehm** » Thu Jun 02, 2005 7:54 pm

Lehm is doing this poll because he is currently working on getting pixel shaders in D2X-W32 to run ... /me thinks.

Nah I'm just out to see how many different ways I can make d2x crash

Diedel, maybe it's about time we showed them why I'm asking this. But that's up to you.

Jediluke · Post by **Jediluke** » Thu Jun 02, 2005 8:41 pm

i use voodoo5

Aus-RED-5 · Post by **Aus-RED-5** » Thu Jun 02, 2005 8:51 pm

Jeff250 wrote:Geforce 5950 Ultra

x2

DarkShadow · Post by **DarkShadow** » Thu Jun 02, 2005 10:33 pm

GeForce 6600

Tyranny · Post by **Tyranny** » Fri Jun 03, 2005 2:56 am

You guys messing with new graphics?

Sirius · Post by **Sirius** » Fri Jun 03, 2005 3:50 am

If I'm not mistaken, the 98/99 SiS chipset came out before pixel shaders were even heard of in the market... so probably, yes.

Not sure how well a 7500 would handle them, but I think it does have rudimentary shaders... probably vertex-only though.

BUBBALOU · Post by **BUBBALOU** » Fri Jun 03, 2005 6:07 am

Msi GeForce G4 Ti4200 w/128MB

jehu · Post by **jehu** » Fri Jun 03, 2005 12:48 pm

Don't have even a recent generation of either vendors card on my FreeBSD desktops, but ATI seems to be more supportive of the open source driver effort than Nvidia (binary-only "support").

If D2X extensions would support it, I'd gladly buy a new Radeon and install an XP boot-partition just to play D!

Diedel · Post by **Diedel** » Sat Jun 04, 2005 5:05 pm

Tyranny wrote:You guys messing with new graphics?

Lehm has built lightmapping and pixel shaders into D2X-W32. It's not quite ready for the public though imho (frame rates drop to 30 fps on my X800 XT PE in the 1st level of the D2 campaign, and the lightmapping code does not support DLE-XP custom lights). But - Lehm has come pretty far already, I wouldn't wonder if he managed to iron these things out, too.

De Rigueur · Post by **De Rigueur** » Sat Jun 04, 2005 9:02 pm

Aus-RED-5 wrote:
Jeff250 wrote:Geforce 5950 Ultra
x2

ditto

fliptw · Post by **fliptw** » Sat Jun 04, 2005 9:19 pm

jehu wrote:Don't have even a recent generation of either vendors card on my FreeBSD desktops, but ATI seems to be more supportive of the open source driver effort than Nvidia (binary-only "support").

ATI's drivers are as opensourced as Nvidia's - both are proprietary binaries - the amount of patents that going to both companies hardware pretty much precludes it(it really would hamper patent lawsuits very badly).

Don't confuse the work of others for ATI's.

jehu · Post by **jehu** » Sun Jun 05, 2005 12:37 pm

fliptw, no confusion here.

Compare Nvidia's driver page:

http://www.nvidia.com/object/unix.html

with ATI's:

https://support.ati.com/ics/support/KBA ... stionID=23

Nvidia provides binary-only drivers.

ATI also provides binary-only drivers, and further "supportive" information on "the open source driver effort".

Admiral LSD · Post by **Admiral LSD** » Sun Jun 05, 2005 1:15 pm

...unless you happen to own an R300 or up card and then you're stuck with binary-only drivers. Of course, that wouldn't really be a problem if the Linux crowd would just pull their heads out of their asses and keep things remotely stable. One of the reasons I quit using Linux was that I got sick and tired of cleaning up other peoples messes.

fliptw · Post by **fliptw** » Sun Jun 05, 2005 8:39 pm

Ok, I forgot the DRI project.

But, the page that jehu links to doesn't mention anything about ATI itself providing proper (2d and 3d) info about drivers unless you pay a license fee.

Admiral LSD · Post by **Admiral LSD** » Mon Jun 06, 2005 1:47 am

That depends on the card series. Prior to the r300s ATi supported open source driver efforts fairly well. As a result, cards like the 8500 and it's assorted "9x00" spin-offs (9000, 9100, 9200 and I *think* 9250) are fairly well supported by open source drivers as well as the ATi proprietary ones. However they've pretty much clammed up with the r300s and up, claiming "trade secrets" or some such BS meaning owners of these cards (me and my 9500 Pro included) have little choice but to use the binary ones (r300 is still pre-pre-pre-pre-pre-pre-pre-pre-pre-pre-pre-pre-pre-pre-pre-pre-pre-pre-pre-pre-pre-pre-pre-alpha last I checked and barely usuable for anything and likely to stay that way for quite some time due to both the time and effort required to reverse engineer ATi's drivers and the tendency of open source stuff toward boneheaded brokenness).

Riot · Post by **Riot** » Mon Jun 06, 2005 8:36 pm

Yeah I've been testing these new pixel shading maps for the radeon..

*drool* You guys are going to fall in love when you see what they've got going on.

Can I post a preview, please you guys?

*placeholder for image*

Bad@sskow · Post by **Bad@sskow** » Thu Jun 09, 2005 1:22 pm

I like nVidia's geforce better but with the betterness comes a higher price, which I cannot afford. I'd like to see what ATI cards can do with their new multi-GPU solution (whatever the hell they call it I don't remember).

kencl · Post by **kencl** » Sun Jun 12, 2005 6:22 pm

Built by ATI 9800 Pro 64 - very happy with this card

3803 · Post by **3803** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 3:46 pm

ati firegl2 on this laptop, gf2 mx on my older pc...runs good though, and the colors/blending actually look better with the gf2mx.

Could be the firegl (render card)

Tankie2 · Post by **Tankie2** » Sat Jun 18, 2005 9:17 pm

I used 3dfX voodoo 4500 32 megabytes in my "D-Box". I run Descent 2 and DEescent 3 in glide always on this machine. Descent(1) is really awesome looking in D1_3dfx.exe but has no mouse support. I actually think it is the best looking of all the Descent voodoos. I have run yup from Monster Voodoo(4 meg)/ATI 4 meg Mach 64 combo, 3dfx Voodoo2(8 meg)ATI 4 meg Mach 64 combo, 3dfx voodoo3 PCI (16 meg), 3dfx voodoo3 AGP (16 meg), 3dfx voodoo4.
Voodoo3 AGP runs Descent3 fairly well, much better than my TNT2 64 meg card can run it in Open GL or D3D/ The voodoo3 PCI really can't cut it. The Voodoo4 32 meg runs D3 as well as the TNT2 64 can run it in D3D but the Nvidia TNT2 has the edge in Open GL. Personally, for most of the Descent3 multi player missions, I'd rather play Descent3 on a 16 meg voodoo3 AGP card than even using the Gforce4 128 meg. I'd REALLY like to have a 32 meg Voodoo3, they are a bit easier to find than a voodoo4, so if you get a chance to snag one, do it. the Voodoo3 PCI card is ideal add in for a second monitor set up, in a dual boot situation with win 98 it runs D1 and D2 voodoo just fine. just disable the AGP card in win 98 using the hardware manager and boot to a "D" box. It is a fine secondary monitor card in XP and XP has built in support for the voodoo3 cards. All three Descents are playable on my XP only machine with a GForce 4 128 meg video card. Several of the Descent "X" mods work fine for D1 and D2 in Open GL but I prefer Direct 3d for Descent3.

(all my CPU ar 1200 Mhz or better with 500 Megs RAM)

TigerRaptor · Post by **TigerRaptor** » Sat Jun 18, 2005 9:42 pm

Still using the Radeon 9200 but I'll be upgrading soon.

Sirius · Post by **Sirius** » Sun Jun 19, 2005 1:41 am

It's somewhat sad that Descent 3 runs better on ancient cards than a GF6800 (or so I've been told)...

Which video card to you use?

Which VC?

Which video card to you use?

well..