3dfx Drops Video Card Division 147
Uglor writes: "3dfx is getting out of the video card market. After two years of shrinking revenue, stock price and market share, they are going back to a chips-only company. Will this let them reclaim the top spot on the 3d market? Or could this just make nVidia work twice as hard to beat them?" So it doesn't mean that you won't be able to buy a card whose guts are made by the 3dfx folks, only that the box will probably have someone else's name a whole lot bigger.
And ewhac points to an Adrenaline Vault story, which "suggests that 3Dfx is going to move away from the PC hardware arena and refocus toward licensing their technology for use in visual simulation and training systems. If true, this would basically leave NVidia and ATI as the remaining major 3D graphics players. (Now if NVidia would just crack open their docs so we can support their chips...)"
Re:Also... (Score:1)
Wow less choice in video cards real spiffy (Score:1)
STB + 3dfx = bad idea from the start (Score:4)
3dfx learned a very difficult and expensive lesson with its purchase of STB: it's too easy to spread yourself too thin. As a chip manufacturer, 3Dfx only had to deal with designing the chips, manufacturing them, writing drivers, and selling the chips to manufacturers.
Once 3dfx decided to make its own video cards, it had to worry about technical support, more extensive marketing (actual product promotion, not just brand promotion), the manufacturing of the rest of the components, etc. It's very hard to do all of these and do a decent job of them. The once-nimble 3dfx fell behind nVidia in product release schedule, and many of the products it did released were far from polished enough (remember the shoddy quality of the first Voodoo 3 drivers?) to win over the very same gamers that once used Voodoo 2 SLI rigs religiously.
The only company to date that's pulled this off well is ATI, and they didn't exactly do it right overnight. The constant delays of the Rage 128 line cost ATI valuable market share, because in the time that ATI took to finally ship the Rage 128 nVidia had released the TNT2, which was superior to ATI's offering. Had ATI not needed to worry about actually manufacturing and supporting the video cards, it could have probably gotten the Rage 128 out on time, and ATI could have gotten a lot greater sales out of it. ATI only managed the minor coup that it pulled with Radeon because it has expanded greatly in the past year or so to be able to manufacture both chips and cards.
Incidentally, this is hardly the first failure of video-chip-manufacturers-turned-video-card-makers. S3 also suffered huge losses after buying Diamond Multimedia, with a large part of the blame lying in the decision to maufacture their own video cards, and they eventually had to sell their graphics chip business to Via. Of course, Diamond's infamously bad tech support and drivers probably helped destroy S3's video business just as much as the extra "dead weight" that video card manufacturing brought on, but then again S3 wouldn't have had to consider that if they just manufactured video chips and left the product support to somebody else.
On a lighter note, do you think they'll bring back the capital D in 3Dfx? :)
Over-Exaggerated Press Release (Score:1)
To the average gamer, 3dfx still has the strongest brand name. Nvidia still has a reputation for making crappy cards because their bundled cards make them look bad compared to what customers see in the retail stores.
Of course, this is only based on my opinion from advising dozens of new computer users here at work:
"Why don't you upgrade the Nvidia/ATI card that came with your computer to a better Nvidia/ATI card?"
"Because it sucks -- I want to get a GOOD card."
Sorry, but before it was mostly ATI cards or chipsets bundled with new computers and now you're seeing more Nvidia cards bundled, but the end-result is the same.
Re:But will third parties take them back? (Score:1)
I'm not sure what to think about the current state of S3. They spin off the video cards, the audio cards are rumored to be dropped and they change their name. Doesn't give me any warm fuzzy feelings when thinking about them.
Re:3dfx is NOT leaving the consumer market (Score:1)
the Nvidia -- SGI connection. (Score:2)
Obviously, faced with that influx of talent into their competitor, 3dfx was doomed. SGI is the leader when it comes to OpenGL drivers and hardware.
Great big googly moogly, 3dfx's next board was going to be 2X the price of their competitor for similar performance -- not exactly the sharpest strategy to gain market share.
Re:What should I buy now that I can't get a V56K? (Score:1)
Re:3dfx is NOT leaving the consumer market (Score:1)
Re:Not surprising... (Score:1)
Sorry for being vague. (Score:1)
Linux is a kernel, and systems are built around this kernel. These systems typically have a full suite of GNU software around them. Because RMS felt that he and the rest of the GNU project weren't getting due credit, he proposed the name "GNU/Linux" as the "more proper" way of referring to a Linux distribution. Unfortunately (perhaps this is what was intended) some people take this to mean that Linux==GNU. Linux is not part of the GNU project, and while I don't know why not, I would say it is due to sentiments expressed in your comment. The larger Linux community simply wants a more reliable, stable, secure OS than what commercial vendors offer. The larger community doesn't mind the occasional proprietary program (I'd like to see Photoshop and QuarkXPress ported...and if you reply mentioning The GIMP you get no points from me) and welcome any addition to the Linux fold provided it violates no licensing agreements.
If you don't want to see companies like NVIDIA doing this sort of thing, tell them in a way they'll understand: vote with your money (buy from Free Software-friendly vendors.) But do NOT imply that Linux is somehow GNU. HURD is GNU. Linux is not. The larger community will kindly thank you to not coerce the masses into believing that Linux is GNU by using deceptive naming practices.
Re:Not surprising... (Score:2)
I don't know if they fixed it between the Voodoo 3 and the Voodoo 5, but the V3 was horrible at Alpha shading, as it relied on the CPU to handle the alpha calculations for it. (at least in OpenGL)
Voodoo4 PCI vs. GeForce MX PCI article (Score:2)
This may not be a bad thing. (Score:1)
This might just save them, if the card makers will go back with them (which i think they will, anything to make a buck!)
Re:Not surprising... (Score:2)
nVidia may be able to stop 3rd party 3dfx boards (Score:2)
You've got a real good point there. nVidia is getting to the point where they have real monopoly power from a boardmaker's perspective, since ATI and Matrox don't sell chipsets. S3 (who sold their graphics division to VIA) still sells chipsets, but seems to be focusing on cheap integrated video and probably won't be coming out with anything new for a long time.
Now that 3dfx is now on shaky financial ground, it's sort of like the situation that used to exist with Intel, when AMD was still weak. A company could piss off Intel, but had to worry about the future possibility of AMD going under. If, say, Creative wanted to make 3dfx boards, nVidia could simply threaten to cut them off.
V5 6000 Dead! (Score:1)
T-Buffer is also very cool, but I haven't heard of anything that really uses it.
Re:Now ain't that a coincidence? (Score:1)
Re:Also... (Score:1)
Because the interface is standard, games dont care if you run a 3dfx or nVidia chip, just that it runs OpenGL. A new guy can come in with a new way to render x, or compute y, and (of course) speed everything up with better quality and compete because people aren't locked into a proprietary API (Glide).
Besides, a new guy doesn't need his own chip fab, nVidia doesn't even fab their own chips, you just need a design and some VC.
FunOne
Re:This may be a small point, (Score:1)
Re:Hell, Nvidia tried to by 3DFX... (Score:1)
As far as I know, 3dfx never had gained any real OEM sales, so, they lost nothing.
Re:Not surprising... (Score:1)
either Mac users who didn't want to wait for ATI to make a Mac Radeon, or were fed up with ATI's generally asshole-ish treatment of the mac market, and bought one last summer...
Or people who thought that FSAA in hardware was more important than hardware T&L, and bought one before Nvidia/ATI put software FSAA into their drivers.
Now, there's pretty much no reason, though the Voodoo 4 4500 PCI is a pretty good Mac budget card. (on the PC end, the GeForce 2 MX smacks it down)
Hell, Nvidia tried to by 3DFX... (Score:1)
Nvidia licenses their chips to everyone under the sun. They are taking over the mobile market with the low power geforce mx from ATI. They took the PCI market from 3DFX/ATI with the PCI version of the Geforce. Thier boards have worked flawlessly in dual monitor setups for years. Xbox will use a Nvidia chip. You can buy dozens Geforce Cards from vendors, but you can only buy 1 brand of 3dfx boards...
I'll never understand, when they owned the market, why the hell they stopped selling chips to video card manufactures vendors.
What about... (Score:1)
OK, I'm just asking this because I love saying their name... (Bitboys OY!)
What the???? (Score:1)
Seems really odd to ditch the card manufacturing business after acquiring a card manufacturer
And yet no real documentation (Score:1)
Re:great.... (Score:1)
Besides, I'm don't care for NVidia's practices either. They say you can't get the source code because of patents. You know who's patents their talking about? SGI!
SGI is very willing to have NVidia release code.
They need an Idiot rating to go with karma.
Pan
Re:From a Linux point of view, this is sad (Score:1)
That's not true... For example, the nv driver from XFree86 cvs does support the GeForce2 now, as compared to their last release. Obviously, however, no one is really putting much effort into getting 3D going on the cards since it's basically a futile attempt.
Ranessin
Re:3dfx might just be in for a surprise (Score:1)
Re:great.... (Score:1)
SGI, RedHat, and 3dfx, among others, I believe.
"You know who's patents their talking about? SGI!"
You know this for a fact? My understanding is that they've licensed technology from another of other companies...
"SGI is very willing to have NVidia release code."
As is VA Linux, their other partner in developing the nVidia drivers (as well as the current company developing the DRI).
Remember, even 3dfx had a lousy policy concerning Linux in the beginning. I have little doubt that nVidia will turn around. Maybe not tomorrow, and maybe not next month, but it will happen (especially with the pressure on them to do so).
Ranessin
Re:oh this is just wonderful (Score:1)
Re:oops, one other thing (Score:2)
Actually those drivers did perform pretty well though. All inputs worked, you could tune to different stations, xawtv was fine, hardware scaling, automatic stereo detection, pal/ntsc independent!!!(this is something that the official win-drivers didn't support - only components that are pal/ntsc-dependent are the tuner and stereo-decoder).
Once I got my ntsc-version to display pal-source on screen and after some negotiations with 3dfx gave up on the possibility to use their realtime mpeg2-encoder (licensed from another company) I lost my interest alltogether-I was hoping to make something like tivo back then(before tivo existed, I think..). There are still some people, to my knowledge, playing with the source at sourceforge, project v3tv if anyone is interested.
Ok. (Score:1)
Wait a sec... (Score:2)
--
Re:STB + 3dfx = bad idea from the start (Score:1)
I was speaking hypothetically about ATI not manufacturing their own video cards; I didn't actually expect them to change their business plans. The Rage 128, like the Radeon, was an excellent product at its annoucement, but the time between its unveiling and its actual release was so great that the products it was trying to beat were already supplanted by a newer, faster generation of chips. ATI aimed for the hardcore gamer market but missed, because what would have top-of-the-line had it been released on time was behind nVidia's latest offering by the time it was actually released.
The fact that the Radeon was a large success with the hardcore gamer market owes a lot to the fact that it was delivered on time, which in turn owes a lot to ATI's expansion. Without the extra fabs, engineers, techs, etc., ATI would probably have had to push the release date much further back, which means they would have to face much hotter technology.
I'm certainly not suggesting that ATI's business model isn't sound. I've used a lot of ATI products in many of my computers (especially the cheaper ones) since the mid 90's, and I'm pleased with the results, although admittedly I still would probably prefer a GeForce 2 card over a Radeon card. I was pointing out that ATI was one of the few companies where their strategy did work, which owes a lot to their size and expertise in the field. You can't expect any old chip manufacturer like S3 or 3dfx to duplicate ATI's success by suddenly turning into a full-fledged card manufacturers. These companies succeeded in making 3D chips because of their nimbleness, and suddenly strapping on a manufacturing division crippled them when they found out that they simply didn't have the resources to spread around.
Re:This may be a small point, (Score:1)
Not surprising... (Score:1)
---
Re:Not surprising... (Score:1)
3Dfx had no competition when it came to the V4 and V5 setups, so they could make relatively shoddy products and (try to) charge whatever price they felt like. But you know, I paid $300 for that Voodoo 5, and when a low-end $100 Nvidia-powered card can perform infinitely better, that doesn't say much for 3Dfx's abilities as a video board maker.
I'm glad they're going back to the way things were, and staying out of the business of monopolizing board designs based on their chipset. Still, I'm not sure I'll buy from 3Dfx in the foreseeable future anyway. I had a lot of confidence in them before they became the only source for 3Dfx-based boards, and I lost much of it in my recent experiences with them.
Now if Nvidia would just open up their drivers, I would be totally happy...
-----
Anything that can go wr
Not the OSS way. (Score:2)
2) Bitching at other people to open drivers is not the OSS way. The OSS way is
A) Reverse engineering the specs and writing your own driver, OR
B) Design your own damn hardware and OSS those drivers.
Remember, NVIDIA is a CORPORATION. They don't have to, and SHOULDN'T care about the users, UNLESS it servers their interests. NVIDIA pays good attention to users because it allows them to stay on top in the graphics industry. I have never had a problem with an NVIDIA card (if you bought early-gen Athlons or cheapo Socket7 AGP boards, that's your own damn fault) and ever since the early days of the TNT (after the first few driver releases) their drivers have been totally solid. They're also one of the main reasons why Win98 seems plausibly stable to me.
So quit your bitching and try to see it from their point of view. If they see that there is more money to be made through OSS drivers, and it does come down to money in our society*, then they'll OSS the drivers.
* That's how capitalism works. Companies making lots of money is GOOD for the people. Bitch about MS all you want, if it hadn't been for them, the economy wouldn't be nearly as good as it is today.
PS: Yea, I know NVIDIA isn't giving BeOS the specs to build 3D drivers. Yes it does suck. No its not the same as asking them to OSS their drivers. BeOS GL drivers would be under NDA, Be would write the drivers, and nobody would know NVIDIA's secrets. Methinks that the main reason we're not seeing BeOS OpenGL drivers is that NVIDIA is in bed with SGI and SGI is trying to protect its Linux initiative.
My Voodoo 4.... (Score:1)
I'm actually compiling 3dfx's release of XFree86 with Voodoo4/5 support built in...
Coincidence ? Maybe...
And maybe I should have bought Nvidia or something.... But then there would be nothing to compile.... Technology/choice/life is tough
--
Re: (Score:1)
great.... (Score:4)
3dfx: "Um...we don't support linux, talk to the vendor, they should have updated drivers"
Vendor:"Um...we don't support linux, talk to 3dfx, they should have updated drivers"
while (times_talked_to_companies < sanity_threshold){
talk_to_company(x);
};
FluX
After 16 years, MTV has finally completed its deevolution into the shiny things network
Re:great.... (Score:1)
This may be a small point, (Score:1)
Prescience (Score:1)
Well FINALLY!
I've been saying that this was an idiotic move, almost from the start. And 3dfx's descent into the financial sub-basement has pretty much borne my predictions out.
They basically figured that if they held a vertical monopoly with their chips/cards, they could dictate advances to the industry. Luckily, the industry told them exactly where they could stick those notions.
So. 3dfx has dropped some of that dead weight (namely STB's manufacturing facilities). Now, after they go crawling back to the cardmakers and OEMs on their hands and knees, they can get back to what they USED TO DO so well. Designing killer 3d chipsets.
But they better hope like hell that this 2-year-long debacle of theirs hasn't permanently damaged their chances of shouldering back into the competitive market. And if they maintain the same, arrogant "we know what you "need" attitude, they're going to need to eat a LOT of boot-polish before anyone will touch their wares.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
oh this is just wonderful (Score:2)
We need Captain Open Source!(seriously, I'm not being sarcastic about it this time)
Re:From a Linux point of view, this is sad (Score:1)
Re:Wow less choice in video cards real spiffy (Score:1)
3dfx's exit as a video card manufacturer will not be a bad thing, hopefully it will get them in gear and make better chips.
siri
Re:This may be a small point, (Score:1)
Strong support? No VooDoo box I ever saw said the word 'Macintosh' on it. How would 'Joe Average' consumer know that they could put one in their Mac? They never released anything but beta drivers ("It's beta, so we don't have to support it".)
Not very impressive support, IMHO.
--
Re:Mixed Feelings (Score:2)
Re:Wow less choice in video cards real spiffy (Score:1)
Re:What's a deltic? (Score:1)
Re:STB + 3dfx = bad idea from the start (Score:1)
Now that they're not planning on making their own cards anymore (which is the reason they purchased STB in the first place), does anyone know what is to become of the division that was STB?
the drivers are fine (Score:1)
The gist is that 3dfx should have been coding those drivers themselves. I have tremendous respect for your trying to support the TV functionality in linux for the 3500. You're certainly a better man than I...but like i said, 3dfx should have been in on the game aside from simply letting john q. public figure it out for himself.
FluX
After 16 years, MTV has finally completed its deevolution into the shiny things network
Re:Thanks for sharing! (Score:1)
If your box boots afterward, you aren't running GNU/Linux. But you probably are, so don't do this or you'll be hosed.
(Yeah, it'd probably nuke /bin/rm before it finishes, but this makes the point without being too hairy.)
Re:What the???? (Score:1)
Umm.. as recent as the year 1998 is to you.
Re:great.... (Score:2)
3dfx is pretty much saying "welp, you can have OpenGL or Glide, but you can't have both at once" - that, to me, is not very good support. When they knock off this fractional support trend they've got going on, i'll change my view.
FluX
After 16 years, MTV has finally completed its deevolution into the shiny things network
Back to square one (Score:1)
Well, at least they can admit to mistakes. Now they have to start reaping in the money again... $4 3Dfx stocks don't sound too hot.
Re:Also... (Score:1)
Not beta anymore (Score:1)
Sucks (Score:2)
Hopefully Creative takes up the bulk of the slack.
Re:Not surprising... (Score:1)
Re:the drivers are fine (Score:1)
All of this would have been so much easier if 3dfx would just have had the the complete documentation online.. or had they actually assigned an engineer for this task. It took me less than a month(considerable amount of which was spent hunting a really stupid bug in my code) to go from nothing into almost fully working drivers, and that was my first ever device-driver/kernel-module.. Think what a professional software engineer could do..
3dfx had Great Commercials though... (Score:1)
Re: Geforce DOES do PCI (Score:1)
Sigh... doesn't anyone spend 15 seconds on a search engine?
Thanks for that. Even though you're perfect, it's nice to see the gods coming down to our human, fallible level.
I recently replied in Slashdot to someone who couldn't find (IIRC) an nVIDIA TNT PCI card. I pointed this person to the Creative Labs site, said person kindly replied, pointing out that the card is no longer available.
At least 3Dfx do PCI versions. (Score:1)
If you want a 2nd video card, or your platform doesn't do AGP at all, a PCI graphics card comes in handy. With some on-board memory, the PCI bandwidth isn't necessarily a bottleneck. If only I could find a GeForce or Kyro with PCI. At least 3Dfx do^H^H did PCI versions
If anyone who actually designs these things is listening, I understand that the same chip is used on PCI and AGP boards. Are there any modern AGP graphics chips that can support PCI with a pin strap or a register setting? Building a board isn't the issue for me
oops, one other thing (Score:1)
last time i checked i had a big blue tether coming out of it that was setup for video fratures such as s-video out/in, cable out/in, and the same with RCA connections. Nope, 3dfx doesn't support the TV feature in linux. If i want that, i've got to use a beta kernel with alpha quality TV drivers.
hooray for 3dfx.
FluX
After 16 years, MTV has finally completed its deevolution into the shiny things network
Re:Also... (Score:2)
I said keep up, not be able to produce a product. The 3D market is very volitile; one year, you make the fastest / cheapest card and you're topping the sales charts, then the next, you're merging with another company because you can't hold your own.
Matrox is in no danger of going under, 3D isn't their primary market. I respect Matrox since I've always thought of them as a quality company.
I don't forsee them even leaving the 3D market, but if you're a gamer, the Matrox card isn't the best buy for your money. I've never seen any review that has suggested otherwise.. The main things that might persuade a hard-core-gamer to choose the Matrox card is their Dual monitor or large monitor support.
That being said, any given business should probably opt for Matrox cards (due to quality, features and drivers for things other than games), so if you game-play at work, then Matrox is an obvious choice. But most of us don't get to choose the graphics cards at work (well, I do, but I bring my own machines to work).
-Michael
This is NOT entirely true. (Score:2)
"I can confirm elements of it that are already public knowledge, but I can also say that there will still be 3dfx brand video cards, which this article seems to say is not the case. I'm looking into it. Thanks for the heads up!
Regards,
Alf
3dfx"
So, basically, they will keep their boards, however, the rumours right now are that they might sell some chips just for OEM deals.
Re:What's a deltic? (Score:2)
Re:3dfx's demise: a self-inflicted wound (Score:2)
As I recall... When the Voodoo 3 (and before it, the Banshee) came out, there was a question in their FAQ's about texture size. It went something like this:
That was my first clue that 3dfx was dying (I was a fan of theirs back then). Of course, they removed this question and answer from the FAQ after a short time, and you won't find any trace of it today.
------
Ancient TNT owner (Score:1)
Takes a bit of OC-ing to get the card doing 44 fps in UnrealTournament at 1024x768x16 though.
Why aren't these old cards for sale anymore? I'd be happy to upgrade to a TNT2 for $20 or so...
On-Board 3dfx (Score:1)
Re:But will third parties take them back? (Score:1)
nVidia is the only 3D company selling chips to the board companies (Asus, Guilemot, Creative, etc) and they don't like having no other option.
nVidia are almost getting contracts with the board manufacturer by default at the moment. Creative (for example) must have a graphics board product so they have to go for nVidia, regardless of the terms that nVidia impose on them. As soon as 3Dfx come back, then Creative can say F*** O** to nVidia if the deal is not to their liking.
Remember, it's not just the quality of the products that gets the contracts, it's a whole load of other things including politics.
Indirect Selling (Score:1)
3Dfx and many others must sometimes see it as a real headache advertising their products directly, but actually selling indirectly.
Name Change....Go back? (Score:2)
When they got out of the Chip-Only business and started making video cards, they changed their name from "3DFX" to "3dfx" (No Joke.) Now that they're going BACK to the chip-only business, are they going to change back to "3DFX" and get a spiffy NEW logo? They're changing their market, so I can almost bet they'll change their logo again. I guess we'll see.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
Great News (Score:2)
Im sure this will lead to 3dfx becoming a stronger company.
3dfx's drivers (Score:2)
unlike Nvidia. I own a V3 3000, and havn't had any problems with it, and don't care
for getting a larger card untill games start requiring it. With 120 max fps in q3 on a V3,
im not complaining.
ETRN x
Everyone should start doing this (Score:2)
But they've learned their lesson.
3dfx did some cool stuff with glide. And I thought there'd be no stopping them when they started licensing their chipset. I remember my buddy having a couple of Creative Voodoo's running SLI, and the games just flew. The minute I saw 3dfx decide they were going to do it themselves, I was pretty disapointed.
Hopefully they'll learn from their mistake and realize they can't take on the world by themselves. Nvidia realized that, and cards with their chipsets are the fastest you can buy. Then we'll see some serious competition, as we haven't really seen any for a while. It'll only benefit the consumer.
Now if we could just convince ATI to do the same thing....:-)
-Orty
3dfx might just be in for a surprise (Score:2)
Re:3dfx is NOT leaving the consumer market (Score:2)
Quantum3D did make those Voodoo2 SLI boards, but they stopped selling them. Go to their website. Find anything that fits in a PCI or AGP slot. You will not find it!
Quantum3D pulled out of this market before 3dfx did.
Re:Also... (Score:2)
The Matrox G450 is a nice card for big markets, who care much about razor sharp and fast 2D - with 3D being much less of an issue. And the business market is probably bigger than the "need to have the fastest 3D card out there" market.
I'm in the market for a new machine, but holding out for new technologies (DDR SDRAM, PIV, new Athlon core) - and I really hope Matrox releases a new card with faster 3D before then. It doesn't have to be just as fast (the difference between 110 fps and 100 fps in QuakeIII is not important to me), just fast enough and with the Matrox tradition of great, sharp images.
Re:Also... (Score:2)
Competition is GOOD.. Winners that gain a monopoly in the 3D video card industry is BAAD.
ATI and nVida should be good competition with each other for a while. Both making state-of-the art cards (at almost the complete price range), but once one of them goes... That's about it..
The time to enter the video card market ended with nVida, who stepped up the competition until the then king couldn't compete. With the world consolidating towards DirectX and, on occasion, OpenGL, you can't depend on your proprietary drivers (a la Glide, and many other's that I've already forgotten). Most likely, the only way you can make a faster, more cost effective card is through propriety drivers (such as the failed infinite plains card (forgot the name of that too)).
Couple that with the fact that GPU's are now as (if not more) complex as CPU's, in addition to using state-of-the-art manufacturing, it's highly unlikely that a new contender can possibly dethrown the existing big boys.
In fact, the only thing I can image you could add is move the whole damn game into the GPU (a la MicroSoft's DirectGame or Direct3DShooter... ).
ASICs wired video games as the future?
-Michael
Re:Also... (Score:2)
They were innovative with their environmental bump mapping, and for a while there, they'd produce the cleanest pictures, but apparently this isnt' the case with their latest cards, and ATI (at least) has already caught up with them in the quality realm.
-Michael
From a Linux point of view, this is sad (Score:2)
It's really a shame to see somebody who cast their lot with the Linux 'market', and then lost. 3DFX has always been relatively forthcoming with the technical data needed to build drivers; in a way that n***** isn't.
Perhaps it just wasn't yet time.
thad
Is this a sound move? (Score:2)
Before everyone gets on their high horse (oops... too late), is this really a sound business move? It took them long enough tom overcome all the shoddy off-brand products that came with their name on in the first place, and now they want to start over again?
Maybe I'm missing the point, but although they seem to be producing a load of crap recently, at least it was crap with 3DFX!!! written across it. Oh well, wait and see I s'pose. But, it seems to be pretty unprecedented.
Ben^3 Proud owner of a V3500Re:great.... (Score:4)
Also... (Score:4)
Not to toot my former employer's horn, but don't count Matrox out!
Re:great.... (Score:2)
but the support leaves alot to be desired and i'm all but certain they'll be dumping this soon after they get back into the "chip" making business.
FluX
After 16 years, MTV has finally completed its deevolution into the shiny things network
Re:But will third parties take them back? (Score:2)
Remember, these companyies already have the support/marketing model in place, they don't have to worry about 3D engineering, and (in theory) they're already making money at it. Adding another 'variant' should only help that picture...
the 6000 is dead (Score:2)
Who would actually have bought the thing considering the cost (and considering that it still only really had 32mb of usable memory)?
Re:3dfx is NOT leaving the consumer market (Score:2)
Additionally, I don't think _anyone_ wants to go back to the add-on-card market.. With resolutions reaching 1600x1600, those pass-through cards are simply not acceptible. Back in the days of 1024x768 at 16bit color (in SLI mode), you could always put two monitors on your computer (since you obviously had money to burn).
Additionally, the only reason people went add-on card was because there was no all-in-one solution that could even compete.
It would be an extremely hard sell to say the least.. Though you might find a market back in the 200MHZ legacy computer market (with a full blown GPU).
Another SERIOUS issue is AGP.. Can't do SLI with AGP (unless you're Obsidian and obsessed), and you definately can't be an add on card and use AGP.
I realize you only meant this as a "worst case", but I wanted to debunk it as being profitable for them.
-Michael
3dfx's demise: a self-inflicted wound (Score:3)
How is it that, in January, one could buy a dang-fast TNT2 for $60, while the Voodoo2, a slower card, sold for over $100 everywhere? Simple - the different board manufacturers compete with each other, trying to sell their TNT2 board over somebody else's. The 3dfx board manufacturer just tries to sell their boards to Voodoo zealots, who are, for the most part, GeForce believers now.
Hopefully now that 3dfx has decided to go back to being a chip manufacturer, coupled with a shorter release interval (which it looks like they're trying to do), they'll start making some headway into the market. I love nVidia to death, but competition is always good.
Mixed Feelings (Score:2)
But will third parties take them back? (Score:3)
Whats not saying that they will not decide to make cards themselves again when they are doing better. But then again, didn't they say that when they were initally annoucing their entry into the Dist business, it was to boost revenues?
I wish them all the luck, but its going to be hard for them to win third parties back.
3dfx is NOT leaving the consumer market (Score:5)
3dfx has never suggested in any forum that they will leave the PC market. Why would they? At worst what we're seeing is a return to the Voodoo 2 strategy: a successful one, before they took too much upon themselves. And by the way, Quantum 3D had a kick-ass SLI product on store shelves then, too.
Derina X. Pinchfish
The V5 6000 is now a potential failure. (Score:2)
3dfx has lost touch with the new developments of the 3D world. All 3dfx cards could only output in 16-bit and use 256x256 textures until the release of the V5 last year (okay, the Voodoo3 processed at 32-bit, then blended down to 16, but that's not the same as pure 32!). 3dfx has ignored the innovations of cube environment mapping and dot-product bump mapping, both of which were used in Q3 and will be used in the next DOOM project.
To quote John Carmack on the issue of 3dfx: "It probably wouldn't be wise to buy a voodoo5 if you plan on keeping it for two years."
Re:STB + 3dfx = bad idea from the start (Score:2)
But that buyout made me swear to never buy 3dfx products no matter what. So my latest laptop came complete with an ATI card and my upgrade ... yep GeForce chipset :-)
SLI does not equal multi-board (Score:2)
The aforementioned Quantum3D card was a single board with two V2 framebuffers and four V2 texture units.
Just to clarify.
Derina X. Pinchfish
Now, about those lawyers... (Score:2)
(Just a plea from someone who still enjoys some older games, and doesn't have (or want) a Voodoo card.)