Wish I was part of the 1996 to early 1998 era cards. My dad got into pc building in late 1998 and we were a voodoo family. Voodoo 2 8mb, voodoo 3500tv 16mb, and lastly 64mb voodoo 5 5500. Still got all the cards! Late 98 to late 2000 was still a great ti.e to be alive and gaming though! Being one of those few house holds playing ut 99 and quake 3 in their full glory shortly after release was quite the feeling.
Awesome times! 3D Games were getting better and better! I remember HalfLife was so mindblowing. It was like watching a movie... no it was even better! 😁
Excellent video. The Voodoo Rush is just a little slower than the Riva 128 but it clearly has a much better compatibility with the games from 97-98-99.
You paid dearly for the boost. For me it was not worth it. I had the Riva 128 until the Creative 3d blaster banshee came out. Then I got it on an OEM discount and used it until 2005 when it died a cold hard death.
@@blastfromthepast3073 Here's something wrong. Riva 128 was faster than Voodoo 1. It was the first GPU to beat it. The early Voodoos had no good 3D picture quality - that's why they were so fast. Faster rendering but worse image quality. This was the secret of Voodoo''s. You didn't notice it while playing.
@@illegalquantity Yeah you can say that Riva128 AGP with 128Bit Memory doubles the Performance of Voodoo1. So you are right! The Problem in my video is that the Pentium 2 bottlenecks the Riva. 3dfx was mostly faster because glide has way less cpu overhead.
The Rage II should have a higher fillrate than a Rush. But in D3D it only brings 25MTexel. The Rage II has a 64Bit Memorybus the Rush 2x 64Bit and the Riva 128Bit. But i don't know if the 64Bit Bus is the Bottleneck? In Games without CIF the Rage isn't rly useful.
I really like both cards. But I started with Riva128ZX in 1998 and it was a real beast. (for a short time) I remember Quake2 and Heretic II on Riva128 and it was amazing!
i love how cruddy the textures are in hl with the riva128. had this card with a p2 266 back in the day and was absolutely mortified at how different it looked compared to the gf2mx i had in my main pc. still the riva128 is a great card for the earliest 3d games if you dont want to pay big bucks for a voodoo 4mb. cheers for the vid!
This is a late reply, but its actually a driver setting. Back then little was standardized and it allowed manufacturers to "cheat" a little bit to queeze out more performance. The riva 128 by default had its texture quality settings lowered in the driver. This could be changed in some driver versions, but it came at a performance cost (obviously). I most games it didnt make a huge visual impact, but in HL it looked hideous.
The Rage Pro / Rage XL is another good alternative to the Voodoo1, it does especially well in D3D titles and are very abundant, the latter being used as basic display adapters in servers long after they were well obsolete for desktops. Not bad considering how dreadful its predecessor did in this video!
I had a Voodoo Rush, but a couple of my friends got the Riva 128. At first, the Rush seemed like a much better card with a lot more support. It could play Glide, Direct3d and OpenGL (at least GLquake) while my friends' Nvidias could only handle Direct3d. However, my perception changed when Nvidia updated their drivers and included OpenGL support. Now the Riva128 seemed better than my Voodoo Rush. On top of that, its 2D performance blew away the Rush. Audio playback often stuttered when I scrolled on webpages on the Rush while everything ran silky smooth on my friends' Riva 128.
Right my friend! Riva128 could Push 100MTexel instead of 45-50 like Voodoo. But the funny Thing is that i replaced my Riva128 with a used Voodoo Rush in 99. Because the Riva had bad trouble with Unreal and Quake III.
I had the ATI Rage II in combination with the Monster 3Dfx, later the TNT2, thereafter i had the Geforce MX400. it had taken a long time for ATi to fix the driver problems back then. Texture filtering hadn't worked, and anything more transparent was black. after that ati was completely out for me.
Just dug my first computer out. A HP Pavilion 8176 from 1997. It has the ATi Rage II... I remembered it sucked back then haha. Still does! Maybe I should upgrade it? It's only 24 years too late.
Riva 128 was the fastest and smoothest and best in rendering. My Asus V3000 had no problem in Tomb Raider 3 or any other games. My CPU was Intel Celeron A300 ~450MHz :)
Wow, looking at a comparison of these games, the voodoo rush is barely slower than the Riva 128. These are just older games though, games like unreal, half life, and quake 2, the Riva 128 seems to hold a good lead. But the voodoo rush, even in Opengl as we can see in half life, still has really good image quality compared to the Riva or ati card.
Voodoo Rush had the best Image Quality before Banshee but not as fast as V1. The Riva was a beast but bottlenecked by CPUs (in 97/98) because this card scales up to 600Mhz. And your re right the imagequality is horrible.
@@blastfromthepast3073 : RageXL (Rage3) with custom 5.38.x drivers i get 44.8fps in GLQuake, Quake2 OpenGL gets 33.9fps with K6-2+ 400Mhz Socet7, no tweaks and no overclock, just bilinear disabled or Quake2 OpenGL with bilinear enabled, then 31.1fps timedemo 1 map demo1.dm2. RageXL AGP has all supported API (D3D, OpenGL and 3DCIF), amazing cheap card with right tweaked drivers for RetroPC.
These comparison videos are pure gold! Thank you!
Nice words! Thank you!
Voodoo was on another level.
Great vid and even better music. A trip back into my twenties 😁👍
Thank you! 👍
There's something special about the way graphics were handled back then.
That's true 👍
Wish I was part of the 1996 to early 1998 era cards. My dad got into pc building in late 1998 and we were a voodoo family.
Voodoo 2 8mb, voodoo 3500tv 16mb, and lastly 64mb voodoo 5 5500.
Still got all the cards!
Late 98 to late 2000 was still a great ti.e to be alive and gaming though!
Being one of those few house holds playing ut 99 and quake 3 in their full glory shortly after release was quite the feeling.
Awesome times! 3D Games were getting better and better! I remember HalfLife was so mindblowing. It was like watching a movie... no it was even better! 😁
You still keep your voodoo card!? Then I'm so jealousy of you! Find one at an affordable price is almost impossible nowadays.
ATI called it "Rage" because that's what you feel when playing games on it.
Excellent video. The Voodoo Rush is just a little slower than the Riva 128 but it clearly has a much better compatibility with the games from 97-98-99.
The Rush has the best imagequality and yes it runs all Games from 96 to 99. A very good Voodoo in My opinion. Not as fast as a voodoo1 but nicely.
You paid dearly for the boost. For me it was not worth it. I had the Riva 128 until the Creative 3d blaster banshee came out. Then I got it on an OEM discount and used it until 2005 when it died a cold hard death.
@@blastfromthepast3073 Here's something wrong. Riva 128 was faster than Voodoo 1. It was the first GPU to beat it. The early Voodoos had no good 3D picture quality - that's why they were so fast. Faster rendering but worse image quality. This was the secret of Voodoo''s. You didn't notice it while playing.
@@illegalquantity Yeah you can say that Riva128 AGP with 128Bit Memory doubles the Performance of Voodoo1. So you are right! The Problem in my video is that the Pentium 2 bottlenecks the Riva. 3dfx was mostly faster because glide has way less cpu overhead.
Without CIF, the Rage II is sort of a lost cause. I almost feel sorry for it.
The Rage II should have a higher fillrate than a Rush. But in D3D it only brings 25MTexel. The Rage II has a 64Bit Memorybus the Rush 2x 64Bit and the Riva 128Bit. But i don't know if the 64Bit Bus is the Bottleneck? In Games without CIF the Rage isn't rly useful.
Nice to see you here, Nathan! The world is small ;) Can’t wait to see your next video!
@Lassi Kinnunen 81 True words! 👍
Rage 2 can render 2D graphics whereas voodoo2 could only do 3D graphics that’s why it was good for its time.
I love the voodoo but the 128 was so smooth. I’ll choose the voodoo every time but nvidia was tempting as hell
I really like both cards. But I started with Riva128ZX in 1998 and it was a real beast. (for a short time) I remember Quake2 and Heretic II on Riva128 and it was amazing!
i love how cruddy the textures are in hl with the riva128. had this card with a p2 266 back in the day and was absolutely mortified at how different it looked compared to the gf2mx i had in my main pc. still the riva128 is a great card for the earliest 3d games if you dont want to pay big bucks for a voodoo 4mb. cheers for the vid!
The Riva 128 was my first 3D Board an i like the texture sandlook too. The 128 was realy fast in Quake2 and could run even MaxPayne... Crazy. :-D
@@blastfromthepast3073 lol yep the texture "filtering" gives it an almost playstation appearance if you ask me :)
@@FOIL_FRESH i like the riva128 look. I Call it bumpmapping for free :-D
This is a late reply, but its actually a driver setting. Back then little was standardized and it allowed manufacturers to "cheat" a little bit to queeze out more performance. The riva 128 by default had its texture quality settings lowered in the driver. This could be changed in some driver versions, but it came at a performance cost (obviously). I most games it didnt make a huge visual impact, but in HL it looked hideous.
The Rage Pro / Rage XL is another good alternative to the Voodoo1, it does especially well in D3D titles and are very abundant, the latter being used as basic display adapters in servers long after they were well obsolete for desktops. Not bad considering how dreadful its predecessor did in this video!
Sonic empire is from 1999. Couldn't have heard it playing in 1997. Insomia or Da Funk would have fit ;)
They played that track Up and down in the german AirPlay Charts.
ATI rage 2 + dvd my first own video card back when I was in my 20ties. and it was shit 😳😭. Still got it in my museum though. Excellent vid. Thank you.
Haha okay 😂 Thank you!
Awesome video!
😄
Thank you 😁
I had a Voodoo Rush, but a couple of my friends got the Riva 128. At first, the Rush seemed like a much better card with a lot more support. It could play Glide, Direct3d and OpenGL (at least GLquake) while my friends' Nvidias could only handle Direct3d. However, my perception changed when Nvidia updated their drivers and included OpenGL support. Now the Riva128 seemed better than my Voodoo Rush. On top of that, its 2D performance blew away the Rush. Audio playback often stuttered when I scrolled on webpages on the Rush while everything ran silky smooth on my friends' Riva 128.
Right my friend! Riva128 could Push 100MTexel instead of 45-50 like Voodoo. But the funny Thing is that i replaced my Riva128 with a used Voodoo Rush in 99. Because the Riva had bad trouble with Unreal and Quake III.
I had the ATI Rage II in combination with the Monster 3Dfx, later the TNT2, thereafter i had the Geforce MX400. it had taken a long time for ATi to fix the driver problems back then. Texture filtering hadn't worked, and anything more transparent was black. after that ati was completely out for me.
Great video, great music! Rave on!
Thank you my friend! ☺
ATI Rage II in Ignition = Perfection
Now we know why they called it the Rage XD
Yes for sure. :-D
Just dug my first computer out. A HP Pavilion 8176 from 1997. It has the ATi Rage II... I remembered it sucked back then haha. Still does! Maybe I should upgrade it? It's only 24 years too late.
You can upgrade to rage 128 for cheap now! ☺
@@blastfromthepast3073 very true!
Riva 128 was the fastest and smoothest and best in rendering. My Asus V3000 had no problem in Tomb Raider 3 or any other games. My CPU was Intel Celeron A300 ~450MHz :)
And how about midtown madness 1 or Fifa 99?
oof. What happened with tomb raider 3
Wow, looking at a comparison of these games, the voodoo rush is barely slower than the Riva 128. These are just older games though, games like unreal, half life, and quake 2, the Riva 128 seems to hold a good lead. But the voodoo rush, even in Opengl as we can see in half life, still has really good image quality compared to the Riva or ati card.
Voodoo Rush had the best Image Quality before Banshee but not as fast as V1. The Riva was a beast but bottlenecked by CPUs (in 97/98) because this card scales up to 600Mhz. And your re right the imagequality is horrible.
@@blastfromthepast3073 that makes sense why the Riva was only a little faster.
It makes me think that ATI rage is good enough to be emulated on 86box but it's very difficult to get HW docs based on that card.
yeah!!
I had a Riva tnt m64 my first "goog card"
M64 was cheap and good graphics Card. 👍
rage mach64 nvidia riva tnt ultra nvidia quadro2 pro 3dfx voodoo2
s3 trio 3d, ati rage II
Rage XL 8MB AGP (Rage3) could do better in 3D than Rage2, Rage2 is more 2D card. :)
That's right!
@@blastfromthepast3073 : RageXL (Rage3) with custom 5.38.x drivers i get 44.8fps in GLQuake, Quake2 OpenGL gets 33.9fps with K6-2+ 400Mhz Socet7, no tweaks and no overclock, just bilinear disabled or Quake2 OpenGL with bilinear enabled, then 31.1fps timedemo 1 map demo1.dm2. RageXL AGP has all supported API (D3D, OpenGL and 3DCIF), amazing cheap card with right tweaked drivers for RetroPC.
can you turn on rage mode for 5% boost?
I have rage 2
4mb 3d vram is just absolute minimum to barely play Halflife