what 3Dfx chip was used in Sega's 'Black Belt' prototype console ?


G

Guest

I've always wanted to know what 3Dfx chip was used in Sega's 'Black Belt'
prototype console, from 1997

or rather, what *would* have been the *final* 3Dfx chip used in Black Belt,
in 1998/1999 when the machine was to come out? ....being that early
prototypes often do not have the final chip but a previous generation chip
or incompleted next-gen chip....


* modified custom Banshee (1x PixelFX2, 1x TexelFX2) intergrated on one
chip

* modified custom Banshee2 (1x PixelFX2, 2x TexelFX2) all intergrated on
one chip <--- same as Voodoo3


Sega and 3Dfx inked a contract, IIRC, in Feb 1997. Sega killed the
contract in July 1997.

Banshee for PCs came out, IIRC, in 1998, and Banshee2 / Voodoo3 in 1999.
I am leaning towards Sega getting some version of the Banshee2 / Voodoo3.
but it's open for discussion & debate




keep in mind, that Dreamcast is a seperate matter, since Dreamcast was the
consumer name for
Dural / Katana, the winning prototype console which used PowerVR2.
 
Ad

Advertisements

F

First of One

Pretty sure it was a version of the Voodoo3.

BTW, from what I remember in a press release, 3dfx sued Sega over breach of
contract and won. The money it got was the only thing that kept 3dfx from
going into the red that quarter. Gives you an idea of how small 3dfx was
compared to the industry giants at that time...
 
D

Doug

I remember my first 3d accelerated video card: PCI Voodoo 3/2000. Seeing
half life, Quake2 and Xwing:alliance for the first time with 3d accelerated
video was a jaw-dropper. My Matrox Mystake 4MB had kept me going up until
that time.
 
G

Gordon

Doug said:
. My Matrox Mystake 4MB had kept me going up until that time.

I had one of those. It was marketed as a 3D accelerator yet it didn't even
support bilinear filtering. The clown on the box said it all.
 
F

First of One

The first 3D accelerated game I played was MechWarrior2 bundled with my
IBM's onboard 3D Rage II video. A subsequent driver release enabled me to
play D3D games like Heavy Gear and Turok at 10-15 fps. For giggles I used
Powerstrip and o/c'd the 2 MB video memory from 33 MHz to 45 MHz, but saw no
performance gain. To this day, I think IBM still sells a 2 MB expansion for
the Rage II (bringing the total to 4 MB), for the price of a 6600GT...

Later I got a V3 2000 PCI just like yours. The difference was night and
day... Back then, "high end" video cards sold for less than $200. I still
have the card in a box as a backup, with a Pentium1 fan attached to the heat
sink.
 
D

Doug

Actually, my Matrox Mystique was capable of 3d accleration in three games I
had: Mechwarrior, Mechwarrior Mercenaries and Xwing Alliance. It did predate
any of the 3dFx cards. I wonder if the Mystake was the first 3d accelerator
card?
 
Ad

Advertisements

C

chrisv

Doug said:
I remember my first 3d accelerated video card: PCI Voodoo 3/2000. Seeing
half life, Quake2 and Xwing:alliance for the first time with 3d accelerated
video was a jaw-dropper. My Matrox Mystake 4MB had kept me going up until
that time.

I had a Voodoo I, and even my non-geeky, non-game-playing, skeptic
friends were impressed. Comparing Doom and Quake to GL-Quake and
Quake II with the Voodoo. Massive improvement.
 
M

Memnoch

I had a Voodoo I, and even my non-geeky, non-game-playing, skeptic
friends were impressed. Comparing Doom and Quake to GL-Quake and
Quake II with the Voodoo. Massive improvement.

First accelerated patch I had for my Voodoo 1 was Tomb Raider. I couldn't
believe the difference it made.
 
G

Gordon

First accelerated patch I had for my Voodoo 1 was Tomb Raider. I couldn't
believe the difference it made.

Same here. What impressed me most were the light reflections, dancing on the
walls of the underwater passageways, of the second level (City of
Vilcabamba).
 
J

john smith

3DFX was aquired by Nvidia sometime back in 2000 for a rather large amount
of money. Now nvidia use the technology that 3DFX first pioneered into their
FX range of cards.

The next generation of FX cards from Nvidia will be far superior in design
and speed ATI would be unable to keep up with Core Speeds and possibly
Memory speeds due to lack of the technology that nvidia have in the
pipeline.


Consoles are nearly coming upto speed game wise with all the latest
technology. Xbox 360 (Hyper PC O/C)
, PS3 (major overhaul on PS2) not future proof and last the nintendo 256bit
monster (no name released yet) keep watching for all these wonderful
consoles to arrive.


and to end all this off Nvidia (G70) range of GFX cards will start a
Graphics card war like no other......

in my opinion use what you have and let all graphic card companies that your
happy with the existing card you have as they are fleecing you on the basis
theat you need this technology. Which games use more than 256 meg memory and
need anything over 400mhz core speed for GPU power the software houses work
within guidelines to make games that function with this power source as
above.



You tell me any different in your opinions i would like to Know what you
think...........Adios amigos
 
Ad

Advertisements

P

parallax-scroll

ummm, your post is not entirely accurate and I disagree with some if
not most of it
(not everything but enough to make me feel the need to reply)


quote:
"3DFX was aquired by Nvidia sometime back in 2000 for a rather large
amount
of money. Now nvidia use the technology that 3DFX first pioneered into
their
FX range of cards."

yes 3DFX was acquired by Nvidia in 2000 - but Nvidia is well past
the FX generation of cards (NV3x) which was a semi-disaster for Nvidia.
the NV3X / FX family used some degree of 3DFX technology but was
actually started before Nvidia bought 3Dfx.


the first family of Nvidia GPUs to *fully* utilize 3Dfx technology from
the beginning was the NV4x family. the NV40 - GeForce 6800 and
derivatives use a texturing system that was designed (at least in part)
by the 3Dfx people who designed Rampage's texture system (the so-called
Texture Computer)


quote:
"The next generation of FX cards from Nvidia will be far superior in
design
and speed ATI would be unable to keep up with Core Speeds and possibly
Memory speeds due to lack of the technology that nvidia have in the
pipeline."

I disagree. first of all, the FX cards are dead. FX *only* applies to
NV30, NV35 and any other NV3X GPUs, and *not* the NV40 - GeForce 6800,
other NV4X cards, or the new G70 - GeForce 7800.

Also, your point about Nvidia being faster than ATI is totally
debatable. right now, it is ATI that has the core frequency /
clockspeed advantage over Nvidia. but even beyond that, it is more
about the architecture itself and how much work a GPU can do per clock
cycle. in this area, Nvidia has some advantages over ATI, and ATI has
some advantages over Nvidia. there is no clear cut winner at present.
we will have to re-examine this once ATI's R520 comes out, and compare
it to G70.



quote:
"Consoles are nearly coming upto speed game wise with all the latest
technology. Xbox 360 (Hyper PC O/C)"

huh? the Xbox 360 is not based on PC technology this time. it has a
custom triple-core CPU based on IBM PowerPC, not Intel or AMD X86.
on the graphics side, the ATI GPU is not based on any PC GPU this time,
it is a totally fresh design. and even though this design will make its
way over to the PC in the coming 12-18 months (R600) the Xbox360 GPU
is *not* based on a current PC GPU design. but the Nvidia PS3 GPU,
RSX, is. the RSX is based on G70.

quote:
", PS3 (major overhaul on PS2) not future proof and last the nintendo
256bit
monster (no name released yet) keep watching for all these wonderful
consoles to arrive. "

the Nintendo console is not "256-bit". bits are no longer used to
define consoles anymore. The codenamed for the Nintendo console is
'Revolution'. and although Revolution may or may not end up being the
final name, it is pretty much incorrect to say the new Nintendo
console doesnt have a name.

quote:
"and to end all this off Nvidia (G70) range of GFX cards will start a
Graphics card war like no other...... "

the G70 is not starting some new war. it is not like we haven't seen a
graphics war like this before. it is simply a continuation of the
Nvidia-ATI war that has been on-going since 2000 when the graphics
industry centered around Nvidia and ATI (GeForce vs Radeon) because
hardly anyone else was left after ATI bought ArtX and Nvidia bought
3Dfx.
 
Ad

Advertisements


Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top