SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : 3DFX -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Yeagher who wrote (11360)3/26/1999 11:00:00 PM
From: Jeffrey P  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 16960
 
pcblitz.com

OOOOOOOOO! I'm dumbfounded... The performance jump is logical considering performance leaps (pre V1 to V1, V1 to V2, V2 to V3..) but it's different seeing it in print. Interesting possible feature set.

Thanks for the link, should be an interesting holiday season!

Jeff P.



To: Yeagher who wrote (11360)3/27/1999 2:35:00 AM
From: Simon Cardinale  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 16960
 
You can tell those speculative specs aren't 3dfx's.

Some of them don't really make any sense. Every feature is listed as having "no speed penalty." Might as well turn it around. "No speed benefit from dropping from 32 bit color to 16 bit color."

The truth is that 3dfx shoots for features that don't unacceptably impede performance (i.e. framerate.) Almost every feature will slow things to some degree (unless it's some sort of improved efficiency or geometry acceleration, naturally.)

Most of those specs are a pretty standard wish list that might describe almost anyone's upcoming feature set. More important is the performance of the feature set, and how well it is supported by games and APIs.

And is geometry acceleration really only "reasonably probable?" If these had come from someone at 3dfx I don't think they'd risk scaring us half to death with something like that. Other features might be dropped due to performance concerns, but it's either got geometry acceleration or it doesn't.

Simon