Yeah, it looks like he's really rushing through the Voodoo segment and slows down right away with the clipart. I must say though I hadn't seen the clipart yet but I've got plenty of info on Voodoo technology already.
Sad to see 3Dfx innovate to the level they did and then blow all their money on themselves lol. I started on a Voodoo Banshee with K62 350 and then move to my dream card in 1999: Voodoo 5500 on P3 1Ghz. It was just another level of graphics card!
Voodoo Lights!!! I didn't use a screen saver but I did that one. Was beautiful back then. Now we have animated wallpaper. Need took for a modern Voodoo Lights. And Quake was awesome as QuakeGL
It is worth nothing that in 1999 there were higher end arcade games that were a arguably more advanced in some regards than that 3DFX card, although they were rare and often multi-board systems... 2000 is certainly when home systems started to catch up with the arcades.
It took two 3DFX Voodoo II Cards to get 1024 x 768 in Scan-Line Interleave. One would get you up to 800 x 600. What sucks about this video is that the graphics card setup is not shown. Needed a primary 2D graphics card as well. So a total of 3 cards was needed. Price of each Voodoo II card was around $299.99 back in 1999.
@@michaelfoster1453 that's 6 years younger... I'm talking about a card from 1994 here, that's 2 years before the first Voodoo was released and 5 years before the first Geforce cards...
@@RWL2012 It's a MaxImpact board set and the actual card in my machine, which belongs to me and I borrowed it to LGR 2 years ago to make the video: th-cam.com/video/ZDxLa6P6exc/w-d-xo.html
I've seen a lot of these episodes, and Stewart has really crossed the line on this one. He's stressed, loud, interrupts the guests all the time in a way he didn't do five or ten years earlier. Really annoying and rude.
The show changed over time. It was once a very scholarly-oriented show when Gary and Herb was his sidekick back in the early 80s. Those were the best episodes as they got important corporate executives to come in. Then in the late 80s, early 90s, the show geared itself towards the growing consumer-product market driven with software and hardware so the marketing managers would appear. By the turn of the century, PCs had become much more common, with the Internet firmly entrenched, and consumer portables started appearing - this is when companies simply sent their junior marketing people to do the show as if it were a demo to do down the street. Stewart's show simply went downhill in terms of getting important people on the show.
Quake 2 in software mode running in 320x240 vs 3DFX in 1024x768, fair.... OFC it's blocky in 320x240... It's better in 3DFX but compare at the same resolutions at least to be a bit fair...
If he ran Quake II at 1024x768 in software mode, he would be showing you a still picture instead of playing the game because the game would run at about 5 frames per second with extreme menu lag. He was demonstrating what would be a playable setting on an average PC without a 3D card at the time. It seems people forgot, or too young to know, how nearly impossible it was to run a polygonal 3D game at SVGA 640x480 at playable speed before the advent of 3D accelerator cards.
I'm fully aware of that, I am old enough to remember and have plenty of machines from the 8088 to P4 for retro gaming on era appropriate hardware (pretty much every CPU generation + a few of same for different sound card and video card setups, try doom with a gravis ultrasound and feel the electric guitar). Still not fair remarks on textures etc when comparing in that big of a resolution change, hardware acclerated gameplay in same resolution for comparison in quality then jumping up at 1024x768 to show where the card shines would be a lot more fair.
som99 If matching image quality between the two rendering engine results in one of them being completely unplayable, then it's a pointless comparison. The presenter also would not have been able to navigate the menu to switch to the OpenGL mode because Quake II's menu would have run like a slideshow.
Best would be to switch to OpenGL in the same low resolution as software ran in to see the difference in that resolution, then switch to the high resolution on the graphics card to let it shine. Also software in high resolution would make the GFX card look even better since it would display that it was more then unplayable at high resolutions. Navigate the menu? Console command to switch would do just fine (if wanted to display both at high res). But ignore the high res comparison, I would mainly liked to see a quick comparison in the low res before switching.
Spending more time on some dopey 3D clip art program than mind blowing 3Dfx stuff...yep, I'm watching Computer Chronicles
The episode is about 3D graphics, not consumer 3D hardware, so it couldn't just be about 3DFX and games for the entire episode.
Okay, STEWART!
Yeah, it looks like he's really rushing through the Voodoo segment and slows down right away with the clipart. I must say though I hadn't seen the clipart yet but I've got plenty of info on Voodoo technology already.
"It's a TOTALLY different piece of art when you..." rotate the model 20 degrees
works every time
I still have a creative voodoo 2 8mb card in a box somewhere, ran it with a pentium 2, 266 back in the day with an ati RAGE 2D card
I miss the 90s.
17:19 (in sync) smile and make her say L at the same time
21:36 that little confused glance at the camera XD
Glaring at the 4th wall 😅
Not confusion, that's annoyed that these guests can't talk.
Sad to see 3Dfx innovate to the level they did and then blow all their money on themselves lol. I started on a Voodoo Banshee with K62 350 and then move to my dream card in 1999: Voodoo 5500 on P3 1Ghz. It was just another level of graphics card!
I miss those times...
Same..very much so.
who doesn't..i was 18 years old younger..
Voodoo Lights!!! I didn't use a screen saver but I did that one. Was beautiful back then. Now we have animated wallpaper. Need took for a modern Voodoo Lights. And Quake was awesome as QuakeGL
GLQuake :)
I remember getting the Dreamcast on 9/9/99. It had 3D.
ah I remember it well now it's the xbox series s and x ps5 my how the times have changed hardware wise yet stayed the same for playing games
My n64 does all the 3D I need. The shadows beneath my windows in XP is too advanced for me.
Holy moly discount ross from friends at 6:50
Most of these people are still in the industry
It can export in JPEG, bitmap or TIFF... let's ignore this unknown, new format.. called PNG.
This topic serves to remind me why linear algebra is so important to computer graphics.
It is worth nothing that in 1999 there were higher end arcade games that were a arguably more advanced in some regards than that 3DFX card, although they were rare and often multi-board systems...
2000 is certainly when home systems started to catch up with the arcades.
+HaggisNoodles SEGA's 1998 "Star Wars Trilogy Arcade" is one example of that.
Holy fuck I see heavy gear in the background... God damn that game was amazing...
Haha ya I kept staring at it every time it was on screen. I still my original in box on my shelf. Great game. Let's get out there duelist .
It took two 3DFX Voodoo II Cards to get 1024 x 768 in Scan-Line Interleave. One would get you up to 800 x 600. What sucks about this video is that the graphics card setup is not shown. Needed a primary 2D graphics card as well. So a total of 3 cards was needed. Price of each Voodoo II card was around $299.99 back in 1999.
I've got a GPU released 1994 that runs Quake 2 in OpenGL mode with all max settings at 1600x1200 with around 25-30 FPS !!! How about that! ;)
@@HPPalmtopTube Should I post a video on what a Geforce 2 GTS with a Pentium 4 @ 2.8 ghz will run Quake 2 at? :)
@@michaelfoster1453 that's 6 years younger... I'm talking about a card from 1994 here, that's 2 years before the first Voodoo was released and 5 years before the first Geforce cards...
@@HPPalmtopTube and you won't say what it is!
@@RWL2012 It's a MaxImpact board set and the actual card in my machine, which belongs to me and I borrowed it to LGR 2 years ago to make the video: th-cam.com/video/ZDxLa6P6exc/w-d-xo.html
This must of been very revolutionary back then.
*must’ve
must have
In 2023 we’re using Cinema 4D and Blender 3D
awesome, the date on the bottom of the screen at 13:17 is Oct 23 1998, today is Oct 23 2023. A quarter century, it goes so fast
If only they could see what Quake RTX looks like today...
😂👍
POV-Ray can probably render one frame of Quake RTX quality image on a Pentium 3 in one week.
I started on the Apple IIe, remember the turtle?
The damn horse would drive me nuts
"Get that screensaver up. Bitch!. Im done!"
Antz stole everything from bugs life LMAO
made on the arse end of denim shirts.
Is the young 13:49 !!
Robert Knepper
I've seen a lot of these episodes, and Stewart has really crossed the line on this one. He's stressed, loud, interrupts the guests all the time in a way he didn't do five or ten years earlier. Really annoying and rude.
He has to put all the information in 25 minutes, he need to be fast and go to the point
@Drew In the 80s he wasn't like that.
The show changed over time. It was once a very scholarly-oriented show when Gary and Herb was his sidekick back in the early 80s. Those were the best episodes as they got important corporate executives to come in. Then in the late 80s, early 90s, the show geared itself towards the growing consumer-product market driven with software and hardware so the marketing managers would appear. By the turn of the century, PCs had become much more common, with the Internet firmly entrenched, and consumer portables started appearing - this is when companies simply sent their junior marketing people to do the show as if it were a demo to do down the street. Stewart's show simply went downhill in terms of getting important people on the show.
He knows his guest are nerds and won’t check him lol
It evolved just like the market did. Drive-thru analysis push the product quick.🐺🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑
The Host looks like he's got all 3 going on here- Hair piece. Comb over and spray on hair from a can....
@Drew Jealous of baldness?
Honestly Antz sucked, technically good but artistically bad looking with a poor story.
A Bug's Life superior.
Quake 2 in software mode running in 320x240 vs 3DFX in 1024x768, fair.... OFC it's blocky in 320x240... It's better in 3DFX but compare at the same resolutions at least to be a bit fair...
If he ran Quake II at 1024x768 in software mode, he would be showing you a still picture instead of playing the game because the game would run at about 5 frames per second with extreme menu lag. He was demonstrating what would be a playable setting on an average PC without a 3D card at the time.
It seems people forgot, or too young to know, how nearly impossible it was to run a polygonal 3D game at SVGA 640x480 at playable speed before the advent of 3D accelerator cards.
I'm fully aware of that, I am old enough to remember and have plenty of machines from the 8088 to P4 for retro gaming on era appropriate hardware (pretty much every CPU generation + a few of same for different sound card and video card setups, try doom with a gravis ultrasound and feel the electric guitar). Still not fair remarks on textures etc when comparing in that big of a resolution change, hardware acclerated gameplay in same resolution for comparison in quality then jumping up at 1024x768 to show where the card shines would be a lot more fair.
som99 If matching image quality between the two rendering engine results in one of them being completely unplayable, then it's a pointless comparison.
The presenter also would not have been able to navigate the menu to switch to the OpenGL mode because Quake II's menu would have run like a slideshow.
Best would be to switch to OpenGL in the same low resolution as software ran in to see the difference in that resolution, then switch to the high resolution on the graphics card to let it shine. Also software in high resolution would make the GFX card look even better since it would display that it was more then unplayable at high resolutions. Navigate the menu? Console command to switch would do just fine (if wanted to display both at high res). But ignore the high res comparison, I would mainly liked to see a quick comparison in the low res before switching.
Wow! Ok, it's a tie in the nerd-off. Nobody is impressed.