[HN Gopher] 3Dfx Voodoo Memory Upgrade - 6MB Mod [video]
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       3Dfx Voodoo Memory Upgrade - 6MB Mod [video]
        
       Author : mariuz
       Score  : 80 points
       Date   : 2023-04-01 11:03 UTC (2 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.youtube.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.youtube.com)
        
       | tarokun-io wrote:
       | Nice. I recently saw a somewhat similar video: "8MB Voodoo 1
       | enables higher resolutions in Quake?" --
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4rIDNDQUpU. Fun stuff to watch.
       | When I started gaming Voodoo no longer existed, so I appreciate
       | all of this historic info.
        
         | consp wrote:
         | I also started gaming after voodoo had left the scene but I
         | remember buying two 3dfx voodoo 2 cards for SLI way past their
         | prime to play Diablo II in glide mode (for niceness and
         | 1024x786 res and retro-brag-points). Fun times with cheap old
         | hardware.
        
       | jwmoz wrote:
       | Made in Taiwan.
        
       | stuaxo wrote:
       | The minimally invasive nature - only a single wire soldered on
       | the original board is great.
        
         | psychphysic wrote:
         | Yeah! I expected him to have to lift that pin before connecting
         | it atleast but nope!
         | 
         | So was that pin left floating!? Bizarre!
        
       | t344344 wrote:
       | Macbook users have to do something like this when moving their
       | SSD drive to other machine! Not very user friendly!
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | ysleepy wrote:
         | Related hack: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxbVxaScZQ4
         | 
         | dosdude1 upgrading the soldered on memory in a macbook air.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | pcdoodle wrote:
       | 3Dfx is just plain cool. It was one of the bigger leaps of the
       | era. Back then there was a little cross over from car culture
       | (mods/hot rodding) too which helped fuel some of the industry.
       | This was almost like throwing a 4 barrel carb and high rise cam
       | shaft into a 5.7L Chevy, not very expensive and mind blowing
       | difference of performance from stock.
        
         | HeckFeck wrote:
         | Now that explains some of John Carmack's actions.
        
         | matwood wrote:
         | > It was one of the bigger leaps of the era.
         | 
         | I consider it one of the everything changed moments. I played
         | Quake a lot more than I probably should have. When I got my
         | 3dfx voodoo daughter card, computer games pretty much changed
         | overnight.
        
       | JohnBooty wrote:
       | This is cool, just on general principle. Upgrades of obsolete
       | hardware for no reason other than the thrill of hacking? I'm a
       | fan.
       | 
       | However, as somebody who had a 6MB Voodoo (Pure3D from Canopus)
       | back in the day I can tell you -- that extra memory is just about
       | useless.
       | 
       | Found this article with some benchmarks. The initial batch of
       | 3dfx games didn't target the extra memory of the 6MB cards,
       | because they were a niche within a niche already. Some _later_
       | titles apparently benefitted a bit, about 4% on average:
       | 
       | https://vintage3d.org/3dfx1.php
       | 
       | ...although, unlike the author of the article, I 'm not entirely
       | sure it was due to the extra texture memory? IIRC some 3dfx
       | Voodoo cards were clocked a bit higher than others by default? I
       | know the Canopus Pure3D could be overclocked in software:
       | 
       | http://www.thedodgegarage.com/3dfx/overclocking.htm
        
         | capableweb wrote:
         | > that extra memory is just about useless.
         | 
         | Same goes today, unless you're doing other things than just
         | gaming. But top of the line cards come with 24GB VRAM, most
         | games never come close to using that much VRAM.
        
           | Arrath wrote:
           | That is, reportedly, beginning to change. I've been seeing
           | reports of TLOU PC port choking on cards with 10gb of vram,
           | only getting decent once you crest 12gb.
           | 
           | It may take until the _next_ console generation for 24gb
           | cards to get well and truly utilized, but the 12gb seen on
           | Nvidia's current midrange cards may quickly feel anemic.
        
             | theropost wrote:
             | Looks like new features coming up in DirectX 12 updates
             | will allow for more access to VRAM as well.
             | 
             | https://www.tomshardware.com/news/dx12-optimization-cpu-
             | gpu-...
        
             | humanistbot wrote:
             | > I've been seeing reports of TLOU PC port choking on cards
             | with 10gb of vram, only getting decent once you crest 12gb.
             | 
             | That seems more because devs didn't do a good job in
             | porting a 10 year old game (released in 2013) that ran
             | perfectly fine on a PS3, which only had 256MB of system RAM
             | and 256MB of VRAM. The PC TLOU port is not advancing the
             | state-of-the-art in graphics, it should not be seen as a
             | sign of the new normal.
        
               | crysin wrote:
               | TLOU Part I != TLOU (2013). It's a complete remake from
               | the ground up built off of TLOU Part II engine
               | enhancements. Your point still stands that it's a bad
               | port as it runs on the PS5 just fine and shouldn't be
               | choking decently spec'd PCs.
        
               | kitsunesoba wrote:
               | I believe what's being spoken about is the PC port of the
               | recently released TLOU _remake_ , which is native to the
               | PS5 and designed to leverage its hardware fully. It's
               | still a bad port, but not so bad that it's a 10 year old
               | game struggling to run on a current generation PC.
        
           | psychphysic wrote:
           | It seemed to make substantial difference to Hogwarts Legacy
           | when the seasons changed and almost all textures needed
           | reloading.
           | 
           | It could have been avoided of course. But the difference
           | still existed.
        
             | capableweb wrote:
             | Various sources seems to claim that the minimum VRAM
             | requirement for Hogwarts Legacy is 4GB and recommended
             | being 8GB. Seems to still be far away from 24GB.
        
               | londons_explore wrote:
               | I could totally imagine a big map game having 50gb+ of
               | textures, and demand loading them. If you have more VRAM,
               | there will be less SSD reading/writing as textures are
               | loaded and unloaded when you move about the map.
        
               | tenebrisalietum wrote:
               | GPUs are going to have SSDs or NAND soon, aren't they?
               | "Non-volatile persistent texture storage" branded as
               | "TextureFlash" or "GameNOW!!" or something like that.
        
               | psychphysic wrote:
               | UE4 onwards has this interesting mechanism where it slows
               | movement as you move through a zone that triggers asset
               | loading. It removes loading screens by imposing a
               | movement speed penalty to give it time to pre-load
               | assets.
               | 
               | The pitfall is that if you're short on VRAM you can feel
               | like you're moving through treacle near doors you don't
               | even intend to open! All at 60fps...
        
               | Arrath wrote:
               | That seems so much worse than the oft memed about
               | "glacially slow elevators" or, more recently, "tiny gaps
               | your character crawls through"
        
           | jandrese wrote:
           | 24GB of VRAM is awesome for running AI models though.
        
           | Gordonjcp wrote:
           | Video editing will use all of that and more.
        
             | capableweb wrote:
             | Indeed, so will 3D rendering and other things. Besides the
             | point though.
        
           | SketchySeaBeast wrote:
           | The 24GB VRAM also comes with a ~$2000 price tag. That's not
           | really a regular gamer level card.
        
             | capableweb wrote:
             | I don't know a single person who had a 6MB 3Dfx Voodoo card
             | back in the day, I know plenty of people with a 24GB VRAM
             | card today. I don't think they (6MB 3Dfx) were even
             | obtainable in my country at the time without special
             | contacts. So by any measure, those cards were not really
             | regular gamer level cards either.
        
           | dualboot wrote:
           | I disagree as technologies like DirectStorage and equiv.
           | mature and are adopted.
           | 
           | In addition, undersized vram amounts is one of the ways in
           | which Nvidia limits the usable life of their video cards.
        
       | qtip1970 wrote:
       | [flagged]
        
         | trackflak wrote:
         | In case you hadn't noticed, this is hackernews and not /r9k/
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-04-03 23:02 UTC)