zlacker

>>BirAda+(OP)
My first video accelerator was the Nvidia NV-1 because a friend of mine was on the design team and he assured me that NURBs were going to be the dominant rendering model since you could do a sphere with just 6 of them, whereas triangles needed like 50 and it still looked like crap. But Nvidia was so tight fisted with development details and all their "secret sauce" none of my programs ever worked on it.

Then I bought a 3DFx Voodoo card and started using Glide and it was night and day. I had something up the first day and every day thereafter it seemed to get more and more capable. That was a lot of fun.

In my opinion, Direct X was what killed it most. OpenGL was well supported on the Voodoo cards and Microsoft was determined to kill anyone using OpenGL (which they didn't control) to program games if they could. After about 5 years (Direct X 7 or 8) it had reached feature parity but long before that the "co marketing" dollars Microsoft used to enforce their monopoly had done most of the work.

Sigh.

>>ChuckM+25
Around 1999 we had a PC with both a Riva TNT and a Voodoo 2. The main games I played were Half Life and Unreal 1 (in addition to various games that came bundled with hardware like Monster truck madness and Urban Assault). I found the Riva TNT to work much better than the Voodoo 2 for the main games I played (e.g. when choosing in the game options, the D3D or OpenGL options had less glitches, better looking translucency in Unreal, etc..., than the options that used the voodoo card), and in addition the Riva TNT supported 32-bit color while the Voodoo 2 only had 16-bit color and had this awkward passthrough.

Maybe being 1999 it was just a little bit too late to still fully appreciate 3dfx and modern day D3D and OpenGL took over around that time, so I just missed the proper Voodoo era by a hair.

Note that by OpenGL here I meant OpenGL using the Riva TNT (I assume the Voodoo card drivers must have been called Glide or 3DFx in the settings). I've always seen D3D and OpenGL existing side by side, performing very similarly in most games I played, and supporting the same cards, with GeForce cards etc that came later. I mainly game using Wine/Proton on Linux now by the way.

>>Aardwo+wp
Yep, as soon as the TNT came out it was pretty much over for 3dfx. Quake II on a Riva TNT running in 1024x768 was a sight to behold.

>>flohof+Op
I feel like 3dfx still had a slight edge until the tail end of the Voodoo3 era (when the GF256 came out and blew everything away). But I think it depends what you prioritise.

Like here, the V3 seems to have a pretty handy lead in most cases https://www.anandtech.com/show/288/14 - but that's a TNT2 (not TNT2 Ultra) and it's all in 16 bit colour depth (not supported by the V3).

It was certainly an interesting time, and as a V3 owner I did envy that 32 bit colour depth on the TNT2 and the G400 MAX's gorgeous bump mapping :D

>>smcl+cw
I worked at CompUSA the summer of 1999 and there were demo machines for the Voodoo3 and TNT2, and what I remember most was that the Voodoo looked muddy while the TNT2 looked crisp. Frame rates weren’t different enough to have a clear winner, since there were 3 different Voodoo models and Nvidia had the ultra. I ended up getting a TNT2 Ultra and loved it. Never had any compatibility issues that I remember.

>>dwater+iq2
I owned a Voodoo 3, while all my friends had TNT2's. My experience was the opposite. Not sure if it was the handling of anisotropic filtering, or some kind of texture filtering - but my Voodoo 3 was notably sharper on all the games of the time.