Ok BFG, like I do on the 3dfiles.com board to a person named Jerk, I will make you look stupid.
Might I remind you that 3dfx's boards come last on the accuracy scale when rendering reference images?
We will go to the sharky review for this one.
"3dfx's Voodoo4 deviates the furthest from the software renderer but manages to improve on the image's accuracy. You'll see that the tents in the Voodoo5 capture have all of their legs, whereas the software capture omits a couple of them. The same holds true for Matrox's G450 image."
The Review
Might I remind you of 3dfx's MiniGL crap which failed to run half of the OpenGL games out there?
MiniGL is gone and there was always WickedGL which didn't have any problems. BTW most MiniGL was also impletements into games by the designers.
Might I remind you of the fact that 3dfx's boards have no movie/DVD acceleration?
Pure FUD, they do have DVD hardware acceleration.
"DVD hardware assist: planar to packed-pixel conversion"
Stated directly on the specs of the V5 and V4.
Might I remind you of the fact that 3dfx's boards are lacking a lot of standard features that other video cards have, yet they are priced comparatively to them?
By the time these "standard" features get implamented in games the next generation cards are out.
Look at Cube Environment mapping.... almost a year and still no games.
Might I remind you of the ridiculous sizing of 3dfx's cards which mean a lot of people can't physically install them?
The V5 isn't that big and the V4 isn't that big either. If you had seen one you would know that it doesn't even go past the big motherboards for the Athlons like the A7V, K7V, KA7 and the KT7. So you shouldn't buy one of these motherboards either right?
Those are faults of the hardware company. One game which has poor sky quality when it runs is not the hardware company's fault!
Q3, FAKK2, SOF, UT when adding the S3TC hack all have problems with the sky because S3TC is inferior FXT1.
Oldfart, supporting mutiple APIs is not really indicative of how well the game engine runs. Quake 3 is a far superiror engine because it runs fast, supports large textures and 32 bit colour right out of the box
Hmmmm.... lets see is that the only thing that a game engine is superior for. Lets see a vast open level with the Q3 engine that doesn't choke. The UT engine is a great engine and that is why people keep using it.
Just look at the performance levels of the two games. A 1.2 GHz Thunderbird easily surpasses 160 fps in Quake 3 yet in UT it can't even hit 90 fps. Face it, the Quake 3 engine is far superior to the UT engine.
I can show you pictures in game of UT with 150fps-200fps on a GTS even.
You also forget that ATI cards run this engine fine as well...only nvidia cards choke.... why because they don't support Palletized Textures.
Ben:
Funny that I was able to fix this by editing the Quake3 executable. nVidia's drivers now overwriting game executables to trash games?? They must have it in for people.
You should do a couple more tests. While I found that the fix did improve the sky in one level well, the ones with the red sky still look like crap and the level based texture corruption remained.
<a target=new href="http://web.tampabay.rr.com/mvust/nocomp.JPG[/L
[L=Normal S3TC Compresson]http://web.tampabay.rr.com/mvust/normal.jpg">No Compression</a>
Compression with the Fix
Nothing has been done to this horrible looking crap that is around all of Q3.
Plus when you add the patch I lose 5fps at 1024x768x32 with Max details. Maybe this is a sign that NVidia doesn't want to implament the 128x128 texture occlution like ATI because their benchmarks would suffer a lot.