http://www.nvidia.com/object/IO_20010528_5051.html

there it says that a 6000 only uses 54.40MB intotal when FSAA is used yeah right :-X not to mention that the FSAA on a GF2 GTS was horrid. ::)

i am sorry, but i think this is correct  :-[ I thought it was even worse... 32MB efficent i thought...

A V5 5500 also has efficent 32MB or less... you may wonder if some diagnostic software (or 3dmark) detects a V5 5500 with 32MB RAM.... so this is not wrong, its the real amount to store the texutures and stuff...

That's indeed correct, less than 32MB available (depending on Video Mode/Color Depth/FSAA Mode), that should be nothing new (?)

They didn't write of course, that the GF2 FSAA was a mess, very slow and low quality (since it would have been even terribly slower if they enabled full quality, something they keep doing until today in order to keep raw speed on par with ATI).

hmm strange so a Voodoo5 6000 Ram amount should be seen as 4x 32MB, a 5500 2x 32MB and a 5000 2x 16MB  ?

Got a little confused then heh  :-X Anyways Nvidia didn't say that the 2D was bad also, why not state mistakes they really made, bad marketing? or they are afraid that they will get a bad feed?

Exactly...

Mh..just my few cents here...

I think the 2D quality isn't good especially on VSA 100 Boards. Can't remeber the 2D quality of my Geforce 2Ti (sold it a long time ago), but i can remember the 2D Quality of my V5/V4...wasn't good at all :(

I think your monitor must have been bad. Voodoo 4 and 5 cards had one of the best 2D at their time.

The VSA-100 2D quallity was exellent it even out qullified the GeForce 7 series of image quallity.

quite comparable to Matrox 2D quallity and that of ATi.

@ Voodoo_Freak

I reccomend you looking for a better monitor,  Like NitroX Infinity said:


wrote on 17.10.06 at 13:16:28:

I think your monitor must have been bad. Voodoo 4 and 5 cards had one of the best 2D at their time.

;)

Okay...you say my monitor is bad...I don't think so. It is not the best but it is a solid CTX CRT. Quality with my Geforce 7 for example is good.

So...give me some clues.

btw: Never tested Voodoos with my TFT.

Lol you are mistakenly wrong mate did you know that the VSA-100 still has one of the best 2D quallities of it's time and it even supaases cards of today in 2D ;)

As a Voodoo_Freak we would expect you to know that the VSA-100's were exellent in 2D.

NitroX Is right, it is your monitor, maybe it can't handle a stable refreshrate at a higher reso.

I use an EIZO 20" CRT on my Voodooo5 6000 as other 3dfx cards and really the GF 6800 AGP in that system an AXP 2700+ gives lesser quallity in 2D as the 5500 PCI as 6000 AGP.

Okay must admit that EIZO is a class A brand, which ofcourse suits a class A branded Voodoo5 card  ;D

But it shouldn't really matter twhat Monitor you have my good ole CRT VL500 15" CRT also gave exellent 2D quallity on the Voodoo5 5500 AGP as Velocity 200! okay have to mention the Velocity 200 is a Voodoo3 based card, the image quallity on a Voodoo3 based chip is very comparable of that from a Voodooo4/5

Can't remeber this. So plZ give me some links to compare.

Concerning my nick:
Sorry, but these are my experiences about the VSA100. No need for insults bout my nickname ;)

sorry about your nick name lol, but all the other 3dfx people from this place have tested and and all agree that the VSA-100 has good image quallity, as most 3dfx people I know and many other agree on that part, there is many proof out there, you could use Google lol but yes if you need proof buy a good monitor and find out.

want proof here's proof that the VSA-100 has outstanding 2D image quallity:
http://www.pcauthority.com.au/review.aspx?CIaRID=815

However, the 2D image quality is astounding, with vivid colours and an exceptionally sharp picture. The 350MHz RAMDAC places it above budget competition like the 270MHz VideoLogic Vivid! (reviewed issue 38, p82), and also gives it a maximum resolution of 2,048 x 1,536 pixels at 75Hz. The Video2000 score of 1,761 also gives it the budget 2D performance edge over the Vivid! and the Hercules 3D Prophet II MX (reviewed issue 37, p95).


you could ask Gary, Hank or other people they will all tell you that the 2D is very good and not bad and thier experiences are far beyond many others.

http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=1276&p=2
The excellent 350MHz RAMDAC of the Voodoo3 is carried over to the VSA-100, so 2D image quality is up there with the best.
PWNed. >:(

Yep, although the Voodoos never touched e.g. the Signal Quality of a Matrox G400 (AFAIK the still-standing king in that respect), it still remained above average for its time and way ahead of typical GeForce cards.

Even at work we still have a number of older GeForce equipped Systems and their 2D Quality was real bad from day one (high resolutions are plain unusable, both on CRT or LCD, which have a hard time syncing on such bad signals in High Res)

wrote on 17.10.06 at 20:11:48:

Even at work we still have a number of older GeForce equipped Systems and their 2D Quality was real bad from day one (high resolutions are plain unusable, both on CRT or LCD, which have a hard time syncing on such bad signals in High Res)

A noted issue if you read any "round ups" of GF/GF2 boards.

If I remember correct, shortcuts in the output filters to save money.