🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: alt.games.quake2
Article #598

Re: Pure3d vs Monster3d

#598
From: cal
Date: Tue, 07 Oct 1997 00:00
21 lines
1205 bytes
User1 wrote:
> 
> In article <34372...@metrolink.net>, cal  <cal> wrote:
> >Anyone have a clue as to what the FPS will be between these 2 cards?
> >I was thinking of buying a monster 3d card now I see the pure3d coming
> >out which looks like it will be faster.
> 
>  Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but the main differances between the
> two cards is that the pure3d has 2 more megs of texture ram to play around
> with, and has a neat-o output-to-TV function.  For straight (sp?) 3d
> power, I don't think there is any differance (since they both carry
> the 3dxf voodoo chipset).
> 
> -
> - Gora
> -
Right about the extra memory for textures. Think Ill probally go with
this card as opposed to the diamond monster.
If theres no differance other then the output to TV function Ill take
the pure3d.
Technical Details
Message-ID: <3439CBCE.1916@metrolink.net>
Path: mbox-mo1.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mail
References: <34372F1C.FE@metrolink.net> <61cbf5$pqu@redtail.cruzio.com>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
From: cal <c...@metrolink.net>
Subject: Re: Pure3d vs Monster3d
Date: 1997/10/07
Message-ID: <3439CBCE.1916@metrolink.net>
X-Deja-AN: 278437577
References: <34372F1C.FE@metrolink.net> <61cbf5$pqu@redtail.cruzio.com>
Reply-To: cal
Organization: None
Newsgroups: alt.games.quake2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit