Amiga.org

Amiga computer related discussion => Amiga Hardware Issues and discussion => Topic started by: samanosuke on March 22, 2005, 07:29:57 PM

Title: CV64/3D vs CV64
Post by: samanosuke on March 22, 2005, 07:29:57 PM
Right... I was planning on picking up a CV64/3D for my A3K but on stumbling upon another topic I am now not so sure. What I want to know is will the Amiga screens (via Ambra) be redirected to the CV64/3D saving the need for a monitor switcher? Does the CV64 have this option? Are any WarpGL games (eg Freespace) compatible with the CV64/3D? And if so are they playable? And finally is the performance of the CV64/3D really that bad? I am not sure which of the two to go for if any. Would I be better off picking up another Picasso IV instead?
Title: Re: CV64/3D vs CV64
Post by: Amigaz on March 22, 2005, 08:14:58 PM
Quote

samanosuke wrote:
Right... I was planning on picking up a CV64/3D for my A3K but on stumbling upon another topic I am now not so sure. What I want to know is will the Amiga screens (via Ambra) be redirected to the CV64/3D saving the need for a monitor switcher? Does the CV64 have this option? Are any WarpGL games (eg Freespace) compatible with the CV64/3D? And if so are they playable? And finally is the performance of the CV64/3D really that bad? I am not sure which of the two to go for if any. Would I be better off picking up another Picasso IV instead?


Wonder what Brian & Patrik says about this  :lol:

Guess those guys are the exeperts  :-)

Have an A4000 '060 with a CV64 3D here with CybergraphX V3 (V4 on the way to me) latest Warp GL installed.
Have sucessfully got Nighlong running and Quake I.
Haven't got freespace running yet, only get an error message saying No ModeID selected from the Freespace GUI after the Hyperion intro is finished, the system error code is 8000000B (freespace.exe).
Might be that I'm not using the latest CybergraphX.
Title: Re: CV64/3D vs CV64
Post by: Brian on March 22, 2005, 08:30:55 PM
Without the CV3D scandoubler there's no redirection possible with the CV3D. And with a scandoubler already in place on the A3000 it would be silly to get another one and bypass the builtin for this reason. Also the CV3D scandoubler would have to be moddifyed to fit the shorter graphicslot on the A3000. So for the saving of a monitor switch this is not the option. Going for the CV64 card you would save the need for a monitorswitch but I can't say if 3D software support it since it lack 3D hardware. Can't speak for the PIV at all.
Title: Re: CV64/3D vs CV64
Post by: Amigaz on March 22, 2005, 09:07:00 PM
Quote

Brian wrote:
Without the CV3D scandoubler there's no redirection possible with the CV3D. And with a scandoubler already in place on the A3000 it would be silly to get another one and bypass the builtin for this reason. Also the CV3D scandoubler would have to be moddifyed to fit the shorter graphicslot on the A3000. So for the saving of a monitor switch this is not the option. Going for the CV64 card you would save the need for a monitorswitch but I can't say if 3D software support it since it lack 3D hardware. Can't speak for the PIV at all.


Wonder how Patrik will comment this  :lol:
We are eager to hear his reply... :-D
Title: Re: CV64/3D vs CV64
Post by: Lemmink on March 22, 2005, 10:27:00 PM
As it was allready said If  you want to avoid the use of a monitorswitch go for thr CV64. Though a PIV is an option too, but as long as you don`t plan to use one of the PIV extramodules it`s a waste of money, as the Performance is just about equal and the A3000 allready has a scandoubler.

I won`t expect much in terms of 3D performance from the CV3D. The active support for the card in Warp3D stopped somewhere along the way, meaning the existing driver simply wasn`t updated from a certain point on.
On my CSPPC 060/200 System Heretic II was faster in softwarerender then in hardwarerender with the CV3D back then, though it looked better then in softwarerendering.

There might be a small performance bump with GLQuake or the special Version of Descent (no, not Freespace, the old thing from the stoneage) for the Virgechip.
Title: Re: CV64/3D vs CV64
Post by: samanosuke on March 23, 2005, 09:53:59 AM
I've seen a CV64 on eBay but the cheeky git is asking 199 Euros for it! I paid less than that for my (brand new at the time) Picasso IV currently sitting in my A4K. Are there any other Zorro based graphics cards worth considering? Preferably one which works in conjunction with the A3K's scandoubler?
Title: Re: CV64/3D vs CV64
Post by: Argus on March 23, 2005, 11:36:22 AM
@samanosuke

Try a GVP Spectrum 28/24 card.  It's Zorro II/III autosensing and has a built in monitor switch, so you can run a cable from the A3000's flicker switcher to the card direct; no external switch box required.  It is a nice card, uses a Cirrus Logic 5426 or 5428?? I believe, has 1 or 2MB 60ns?? graphics memory and works with all versions of CybergraphX and Picasso96, but no flicker fixer so not great on an A4000 if you want to use a SVGA monitor and see the native AA screenmodes.  The PicassoIV card is faster, uses a Cirrus Logic 5446 chip instead and has 4MB 45ms EDO RAM for graphics memory and has the nice built in AA flicker fixer; but this card is best suited for the A4000, imho.  In a pinch, a PicassoII+ card is a nice fallback, it has only 2MB of the 45ms RAM and uses the same graphics chip as the Spectrum but is Zorro II only.
Title: Re: CV64/3D vs CV64
Post by: Lemmink on March 23, 2005, 12:05:51 PM
You could also get a Piccolo (nearly the same as the EGS Spectrum) or the bigger brother, the PiccoloSD64 that has 2/4 MB.
The Picasso II+ is a good card but only for an A2000, for a ZIII System it's only a better then nothing solution.
Title: Re: CV64/3D vs CV64
Post by: samanosuke on March 23, 2005, 01:52:00 PM
I already have a Picasso IV installed in my A4K. The reason I am reluctant to get another is simply cost - I don't really want to pay a premium price for a card when the A3K already has a built in SD/FF. So how much slower is the GVP from the PIV? I certainly don't want anything more than even slightly slower. Also, how does the Piccolo compare speed wise? Is it P96/CGX compatible? And does it have a pass through for native screenmodes aswell?

Thanks to everyone so far for their answers... without you guys I might have bought a turkey (CV64/3D)
Title: Re: CV64/3D vs CV64
Post by: Brian on March 23, 2005, 04:41:02 PM
IMHO there's nothing that comes close to the CV64, CV3D, PIV (hearsay) for zorro... these are in a league of their own. I sold my old piccolo 2M card, and tested a Merlin4Mb card.. both was painfully slow, DO NOT GET THEM! I say don't even concider a card with less than 4Mb.
Title: Re: CV64/3D vs CV64
Post by: x56h34 on March 23, 2005, 04:47:37 PM
@Brian:

Picasso II is a nice card, however only if used in Zorro 2 environment (e.g. with A2000). But you are right, even if used with A2000, I'd still rather go for CV64/3D or Picasso IV as they are newer and offer 4MB or video ram. CV64 is perfect for A3000 owners in every way.
Title: Re: CV64/3D vs CV64
Post by: ckillerh3 on March 24, 2005, 01:32:15 AM
Can one use a flicker fixer in the A4000 video slot along with the Cybervision 64 card in a ZorroIII slot and cover all bases?
Title: Re: CV64/3D vs CV64
Post by: Amigaz on March 24, 2005, 05:02:49 AM
My A4000 had a Micronik scandoubler in the video slot and a CV64 in the top zorro III slot before I re-aranged everyting, now using a CV64 3D.
Title: Re: CV64/3D vs CV64
Post by: jlariv8957 on March 24, 2005, 04:08:00 PM
Hi,

I don't have nor this card nor cybergraphx but i'm using picasso 96 and there are some options to emulate amiga native mode (normaly done by AGA/ECS chipset) by the RTG card, i've tested it what a difference with ECS whaouh blasting !! but compatibility is very average, so if you use your favorite wordprocessor it should run fine without interlacing artifact and so on but don't expect play games that use native modes !
Title: Re: CV64/3D vs CV64
Post by: zipper on March 24, 2005, 05:10:52 PM
Quote

jlariv8957 wrote:
Hi,

 but don't expect play games that use native modes !


In my tests years ago I got about 40% success rate for games and fakenative P96 modes. Did not work for F1GP, which I was interested in :-(
Title: Re: CV64/3D vs CV64
Post by: Crumb on March 24, 2005, 05:50:13 PM
As the CV3D doesn't have monitor switcher I would get a CV64. You don't really need a flicker fixer because your A3k already has one, the CV64 has the fastest zorro3 bus access and these cards should be quite cheap :-)
Title: Re: CV64/3D vs CV64
Post by: fx on March 24, 2005, 08:04:38 PM
One thing I thought I'd mention, the CV64 has way better picture quality than the CV643D, I switched my CV643D to a CV64 mostly because of the picture quality and also because it's faster. The 3D part of the CV643D really sucks and you can use the CV643D scandoubler with the CV64 card (if you own an A4000 as I do that is pretty nice).

Only reason I see for getting a CV643D instead of a CV64 is that they're usually cheaper.