So, finally here it is...in german, english and french :p

http://www.x86-secret.com/?option=newsd&nid=875

hmm very nice Minuteman only I did find a mistake or two, but hay for the rest very nice indeed :)

On the Voodoo 5 6000 we can find 4 VSA-100 chips which have the following characteristics:

   - 143Mhz to 183MHz frequency
   - 0.25 microns process
   - 14 millions transistors per Chip
   - AGP 4x and PCI interface --> The VSA-100 has no AGP accellration nor AGP renedering
it runs at AGPx2 66Mhz & PCI 33Mhz
   - Up to 64MB of memory accessed with a 128 bits bus for each VSA-100
   - 333Mpixel/s single texturing fill rate or 166 Mpixel/s in dual texturing


the Voodoo4 has an AGP x4 connector which is based on a AGP x2 Interface but with a 1.5 Volt AGP Voltage

wrote on 23.05.05 at 12:07:18:

- 14 millions transistors  --> 28 Million Transistors ;) per Chip

Hehe, this is directly taken from a 3dfx datasheet  :)

well maybe from the Voodoo3 data sheet, rather wierd though, maybe the prototypes has lesser Tansistors than the production models or I'm confused with my Voodoo5 5500 PCI hehe yeah 14 Million would be right a 5500 has two VSA-100's so you get 28 mil, okay you're right here :) and yes  I was alittle confused hehe

"It would have been a better idea to use "slow" DDR instead of "fast" SDR memory, the cost was probably about the same with much less availability problems "

The VSA-100 isn't compatible with DDR ram, VSA-101 was.

"As far as we know there are around 150 Voodoo 5 6000 models in the world and around 30 working ones."

This isn't even close to being correct, there were several hundred V5-6000 made and far more then 30 working boards floating around.

"At the beginning an Intel chip was used to do this but it had some stability problems"

No, they had problems working on non-Intel motherboards.

"we can also see the 3700A revision which is the last produced one."

Nope, 3900 is the last revision and there is even rumor of a later revision.

"On the next picture you can see what the initially planned card looks like."

This was a non-function card for Comdex, it was impossible to route the traces.

"This configuration is known as Voodoo 5 6500."

Nope, that was a hoax, the Comdex board is also called V5-6000.

Ok, I take note :)

In fact many of the "errors" are due to bad translations from french to english, sorry for that but it was already a lot of work. What I agree to be wrong is the V5-6500, I found many news related to it so it looked ok to me.

wrote on 23.05.05 at 14:08:42:

What I agree to be wrong is the V5-6500, I found many news related to it so it looked ok to me.

If you look at Comdex '99 reviews pretty much all of them refer to the board as a 6000, not a 6500.

Only a site in Japan refers to is as a "6500" that might have been an error in translation.

heh I really wonder if 3dfx did have plans for a Voodoo5 6500, would of made the collection morely complete, I mean there would be 6 types:

Voodoo4 4000
Voodoo4 4500

Voodoo5 5000
Voodoo5 5500

Voodoo5 6000
Voodoo5 6500

I dunno why 3dfx didn't call the 6K a voodoo5, maybe Voodoo6 6000 would of been more descent in order of the names order.

wrote on 23.05.05 at 15:32:31:

Voodoo4 4000 Voodoo5 6500

I understand this is all conjecture but-

There isn't a shred of proof of a V4-4000 VSA-100, a 16MB card was already available that was still selling briskly (Voodoo 3 16MB)

Even the very first VSA-100 prototype was a 32MB card, not 16MB.

You forgot about the 143mhz 4400 32 MB and the 64MB 4800. I suspect the 143 mhz part would have been a cheap "heatsink only" part for OEM's with a spec checklist.

The 6500 is mentioned originally on a site in Japan and was to an extent the only site covering Comdex '99 to do so.

The board designer of the PCB has also stated it was a 6000, not a 6500.

well it could of been possible that there was a 6500 in thier minds , I'm not aiming at those aticles, I'm just wondering if that model was in thier planning and nothing else :)

and yes The Voodoo4-2 4000 has no VSA 100 but it was known that it did have a VSA-101 with SDRAM.

for the Voodoo4 4400, I only know of it's name from a Bios, but that is was planned as a 143 Mhz low cost Voodoo4, never knew that Gary, Thanx for the info, did 3dfx ever build that card?

wrote on 23.05.05 at 21:01:32:

well it could of been possible that there was a 6500 in thier minds , I'm not aiming at those aticles, I'm just wondering if that model was in thier planning and nothing else :)

The board designer was clear it was a V5-6000 and not a 6500. The 6500 is a mistake from the site in Japan, all the other sites that covered Comdex '99 list it as a 6000.

Even further proof- Comdex '99 was 11/15-19/1999 and I have a 3dfx PDF in regards to the V5-6000 that is created 11/9/1999.

3dfx-v5-6000AGP-brochure.zip

I'm fairly sure you can download it from FF, open with Adobe and check the document properties.


Quote:

and yes The Voodoo4-2 4000 has no VSA 100 but it was known that it did have a VSA-101 with SDRAM.

1) This discussion is about VSA-100, so there is no reason to drag Daytona's in to confuse the issue.

2) We don't know the Daytona V4-2 4000 has SDRAM as anyone that has one isn't talking.


Quote:

for the Voodoo4 4400, I only know of it's name from a Bios, but that is was planned as a 143 Mhz low cost Voodoo4, never knew that Gary, Thanx for the info, did 3dfx ever build that card?

1) The low cost part is conjecture on my part.

2) It was mentioned in a spec sheet from 3dfx included with the source code that is floating around.

3) I have no idea is any were made or not.

okay, but it still is wierd that the 6500 was never planned, like the 4500 and 5500 were.

I'm not saying that it's not a hoax, well it has been mentioned on the Japanese site I know that that was a confusion, and I know that the 2x2 cards is officially called:

3dfx Voodoo5 6000 AGP 128MB 2x2 41-4499 Rev.

Norries about that, but my point wasn't aimed at that, but I was only wondering if there ever was 6500 in the planning, I mean the possibility could of been there.

Sorry but I just want to be clear on what I was aiming at. and yes the 2x2 card is not a 6500 but a 6000 indeedydo :)


but thanx for your other juicy info :)

Question to board designer- Attached is a picture of the V6K 2x2 board that was displayed at Comdex '99 do you have any info on the design?

Answer- These were totally nonfunctional units built up just for a dog-and-pony at the show.  Parts were placed, but no routing.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

If you look at the VSA-100 data sheet and see how the traces would have to be run for ram/bus/agp you would see the 2 x 2 design would be just about impossible.

It was something to show the press, just like the Compaq 3500 with a VSA-100 decal on it.

hmm okay thank you very much for that Info, that's just what I was look'n for, thanx my friend :)


Though it was a good strategy from 3dfx, especially in those dark days when you need something to show.

but then again the layout of the Quantum3D AAlchemy 8164 looks alot like of that from the 2x2 V56K comdex card, how did Quantum3D get that working then, if the 2x2 model sounded like impossible :) pretty cleaver from Q3D to have mastered the 2x2 model .

wrote on 24.05.05 at 15:09:29:

but then again the layout of the Quantum3D AAlchemy 8164 looks alot like of that from the 2x2 V56K comdex card.

I'm sorry my glasses must be dirty, I see two totally different layouts.

I think Obi-Wan was referring to the AAlchemy 4116.
The 8164 has indeed a different layout, more 4x2 then
2x2  :P

oh yes sorry I was , The 4116 was my confusion, sorry Gary and everyone else. :'(

Aren't those AAlchemy boards much bigger than a V5-6000 for example and used a proprietary Bus connector ?

IMHO that likely would make the design possible with more space to design around.

Yes FalconFly, you are completely right this board is alot bigger then your v5 6000.

http://www.3dfx.ch/gallery/albums/aalchemy4116/aalchemy4116voodoo3_back.jpg

A good example is to look at the header bracket. It covers
only 2/3 of the entire board while yours covers the entire board.

no he meant the AALchemy 8164's :)

the one you showed is the smaller 4116 :D
Oh well we both can get confused hehehe

here the AALchmey 8164 and yes it is very BIG :

<SNIP> Do NOT direct link to my site please.

I think it dwarfs the Voodoo5 6000 with ease.
oh here the AALchemy 4116:

it's alot smaller also, if you look at the distance between the end of the PCI connector and till the ending of the PCB, but they both have the layout and rough design of the comdex 2x2 V56K.

well, I suppose V5 6000 were to compete with the GF 2 Ultra,
in that sense.
it is still the same range of cards they are fighting with,

perhaps the rampage would have been V6 instead .. which could well be up against teh GF3 if they had stayed in business

the Voodoo5 6000 performance is even faster than a GeForce3 Ti200 in most cases, and some times it can beat a GeForce3 classic.

I read a thread about it over here:

here it beats a GeForce3 classic in 16 Bit colours with the game Evolva @ 1600x 1200 x16!but at 32bit it can keep up, so it would beat the Ti200 with ease.:
http://images.sudhian.com/review/Voodoo5%206000/EV1600x1200x16&32.gif

here a test at expandeble at 1024 x 768 x16 and x32, it would indeed perform like a GF3 Ti200, the Ti200 isn't listed, but it would come across it, the Gf3 ti200 was faster than a GF2 U but slower than a GF3, so the V56K would come across towards that.
http://images.sudhian.com/review/Voodoo5%206000/EX1024x768x16&32.gif

In Quake3Arena the V56K is faster @ 1204x768x16 than a GF3 but in 32Bit the F3 just scales it , @ 1600x1200 the GF3 is slightly faster, to me the performance is equal.

here a test of Q3A in 1024 x 768 x 16 & 32:
http://images.sudhian.com/review/Voodoo5%206000/Q31024x768x16&32.gif

and here @ 1600x 1200 x 16&32:
http://images.sudhian.com/review/Voodoo5%206000/Q31600x1200x16&32.gif

Jedi Knight II Jedi Outcast the GF3 get's it's prize the V56K performs well though:
http://images.sudhian.com/review/Voodoo5%206000/JKII1024&1600.gif

but the tablles turn in Serious Sam the Second Encounter, the V56K would perform like a GF3Ti500 in this game, rather impressive!
http://images.sudhian.com/review/Voodoo5%206000/SS1024&1600.gif

so the V56K would of made it rather well, it may yet have saved 3dfx afterall.

here is where I got the infor from, I thought it was rather interesting to Post:

A Fallen Titan's Final Glory, Part I: Setting the Stage:
http://www.sudhian.com/showdocs.cfm?aid=412

     
A Fallen Titan's Final Glory, Part II: The Voodoo5 6000 Reviewed:
http://www.sudhian.com/showdocs.cfm?aid=413

A Fallen Titan's Final Glory, Part III: What Might Have Been.:
http://www.sudhian.com/showdocs.cfm?aid=414

I know not all info is correct on the further cards themselves, but the benchmarks are perfect, and the history is roughly correct, but yet again a very nice info source.

@Obi-Wan_Kenobi,


Quote:

so the V56K would of made it rather well, it may yet have saved 3dfx afterall

I doubt it, it would have been to expensive for all but the most hard core gamers/3dfx fans.

3dfx needed a card that would have generated massive sales/profit, they did'nt have that card at that particular time.

3dfx was all but broke after acquiring STB and gigapixel, VSA 100 based cards did not sell as well as anticipated and with no money in reserve to sustain them until the release of Rampge they sold out to nvidia  :(

Here's another good article -

Part 1:

http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2002/05/15/nvidia1/index.html

Part 2:

http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2002/05/16/nvidia2/index.html

yeah those stories hurt my eyes, at least ATi survived, never like NV that much.

let's hope that the other brands come back to the high end sector, still miss 3dfx quite alot, they should of never went on thier own, that was also a great setback, when they went on  on thier own.

I wonder who invented the Voodoo5 6000 it's self just the idea of a quad chip SLI based card, Scott Sellers maybe?

well,

if it did make it to the market,
MSRP was intended at US$ 600

so, its still a whooping price to pay when a GF 2 Ultra may cost about 2/3 of that price only and still overall performs just as good except for FSAA perhaps

biggest mistake they make is delaying the V 5500 for too long
and it ended up so far behind the regular GF2, GTS/Pro

in some cases the V6K beat the GeForce3 aslo, it would of done well as most High end gamers go for the best I would of anyways :)