4 ms·
It’s also because the VGA signal quality from the 3dfx Voodoo wasn’t very good. It didn’t have a traditional 2D graphics core at all, so it needed another grap
by pavlov 2y ago
It’s also because the VGA signal quality from the 3dfx Voodoo wasn’t very good.
It didn’t have a traditional 2D graphics core at all, so it needed another graphics card for rendering the desktop (any non-accelerated apps really), and this was connected to the Voodoo using VGA passthrough. There was a noticeable image quality loss from this arrangement.
A Matrox card would give you crisp VGA with nice saturation, but the 3D acceleration was nearly worthless. Choices…
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- georgeecollins 2y agoI really disagree. There were some nice Matrox cards. They weren't as good at 3d as 3DFX but for the time they really improved gaming. I developed Battlezone on G200. In those days we tried to have everyone have a different graphics card because the companies would just give them to us and we wanted to work with every card.
- ryandrake 2y agoMatrox had great hardware, but the software drivers took too long to catch up. I was on the OpenGL team and my life's mission was to get Quake running as fast as the G200 and G400 was capable of. We finally caught up and got parity with Nvidia's TNT2, and then bam, they released the GeForce 256 series, and it was curtains for Matrox because their next gen hardware wasn't ready yet.