View Full Version : Q3 Screen Shot Comparison

23rd June 1999, 09:45
Here it is again. Back by popular demand All shots are labled and taken at 1028x768, reduced to 640x480 for posting.



[This message has been edited by ALBPM (edited 06-26-99).]

23rd June 1999, 10:30
No voodoo3 screenshot yet, Agent mail yours to Paul, ON THE DOUBLE!

Slow PC, 14" Monitor, Clean desk, Windows98SE, Windows2000b3, BeOSr4.

23rd June 1999, 10:52
Ya, what Hunsow said. Come on Agent send it over ICQ.


Fairly fast PC, 21" Monitor, Can't find my Friggin desk, Windows98

23rd June 1999, 10:53
Man, my jaw nearly broke when it hit the ground. http://forums.gagames.com/forums/smile.gif

The hi-res shot of the G400 is really something to behold. The detail on the rail-gun is just incredible.

23rd June 1999, 13:29
You think the screenshot is good, you should see it in motion http://forums.gagames.com/forums/wink.gif

P2-350(@103*4=412), Asus P2B(1009), 128meg PC100, MillG400 32meg(PD5.20.???), CL SB Live!Value, CL PC-DVD, Mitsumi CD-R, WD UDMA 8.4&6.4 gig, (2)USR 56k(multilinked), 3Com 905B-TX, etc...

23rd June 1999, 19:03
OK ladies, keep your panties on... the chances of me seeing you lot online is very slim.

Grab 'em yourselves :p

<a href="ftp://greedo.nw.com.au/dave/q3v3/">ftp://greedo.nw.com.au/dave/q3v3/</a>

24th June 1999, 10:52
Ok, I've added a V3-3000 screenshot. I have the shot I needed thanks to Joel, for sending 0004 to me.


[This message has been edited by ALBPM (edited 06-24-99).]

24th June 1999, 13:41
wow, my screenies are hot property http://forums.gagames.com/forums/wink.gif trust me when I say that shot doesn't do it justice. I'll send ALBPM a non-gamma ****ed up version. The problem is my monitor is tweaked for graphic design, not gaming, thus the gamma and colour temps always look funky in screenshots. I'll be getting a new monitor soon (a ViewSonic PT755) so hopefully my next screenies will be more indicative of what it really looks like.

Gawd, listen to me, I'm sticking up for 3dfx again!

the card is crap, the card is crap, the card is crap... c'mon Agent, BELIEVE! hehe

Changing the subject, did you guys happen to read 3dfx's press release? V3 is outselling all other 2.5 generation cards by 450% in retail outlets, what I wanna know is, WHY? it's not that much cheaper... I guess 3dfx still has a name that the less dedicated users easily recognise as 'performance'.

[This message has been edited by Agent (edited 06-24-99).]

25th June 1999, 21:54
OK folks, a more accurate and up-to-date voodoo3 shot is on here now...

Celeron 300A @ 464, BH6(KG), 128MB Corsair CAS2 PC100, Voodoo3 3000 (166), SBLive!Value, 4.3GB + 8.4GB Fireball CRs, 10Mb Netgear NIC, Internal ZIP100, Sidewinder Freestyle Pro

26th June 1999, 02:16
Just added a Permedia 3 screen shot from a reveiw which you can find here:
systemlogic.net/Articles/Screenshots/q3per3/ (http://systemlogic.net/Articles/Screenshots/q3per3/)

Hopefully they will send me a shot to match the others.


26th June 1999, 13:28
NOYB2, I can't even see the difference between the Hercules and the g400's Railgun detail.


Asus P2B-F, 496MHZ Pentium II (4x124!!), Global Win VEK12 hs/fan, 128MB Micron PC133, Maxtor 4GB, SB AWE 32, Creative DVD 2x, Mitsumi CDR 2x/8x, Sony Trinitron 17", Old Matrox Video Card, and a redhead with a pair of 36Cs (O/Ced to 38Cs)

26th June 1999, 16:27
Thanks to Dave over at SystemLogic I now have the screen shot needed. Man, those guys are fast over there. They are also the ONLY site to post any info on Permedia 3.


27th June 1999, 06:32
The railgun detail is very nice on the Herc as well.

However, take a look at the ramp leading to the railgun on the TNT2. Blurry as heck.

Tsk, tsk so close to be perfect.

27th June 1999, 14:33
What you observed are the number of rendering or Mip Map levels. The G200 for instance has only 5 levels and like the TNT2, the path looses detail after a short distance. The G400 supports 11 levels and will show more detail at a greater distance than the G200 or TNT2 cards.
The ATI card looks great but look at the clouds just below the 'ATI' where I labeled the shot. Do you see the texture, a kind of cross-hatch(xxxx). Then look around the rest of the image and you will notice how that texture is everywhere. Almost like a 16bit texture instead of 32bit.


27th June 1999, 15:07
I took a good look at the shots and I can also see the blurry ramp of the TNT2 and G200 that NOYB2 was referring to; but I also notice what seems to be a lower level of color in the G400 shots compared to both the TNT2 and the G200. The TNT2 just looks more lush. Taking this into consideration, I think the TNT2 comes out on top in this one...

AMD-k6 350
Millienium G200 AGP
Azza Motherboard
8.4G Maxtor

Mad man
28th June 1999, 13:34
I think that some thing other than mip map levels may be responsible for the blur of the ramp because the TNT2 lets you set the number of mip map levels up to twelve and that didn't make a difference. Maybe that feature isn't fully enabled in the drivers yet. Don't know though.

28th June 1999, 18:38
I wouldn't put too much stock in colour comparison as these images have all been captured, converted, gamma corrected to different levels and resized.

28th June 1999, 21:02
When zooming it seems that the G400 shots show most JPEG quality loss.

These are just shots, and being just that I think I like the overall quality of the G400 shots best. The colours of the Permedia3 shot seem more realistic though (for whatever reason).

28th June 1999, 22:40
I think that's because they just HAD TO use all the colors there are in that game, and Permedia3 produces them flat and dim enough so they seem more realistic.

So Q3 surely looks better than with the competitiors but with games whose colors have been actually chosen carefully it would look bad.


Excel 7.0, Winamp 2.23, Adobe Acrobat 4.0, QuickTime 4

[This message has been edited by Buuri (edited 06-29-99).]

29th June 1999, 13:17
Gotta be honest here, screenshots are a pretty lame way to judge a card. However, it is kinda interesting to see just how much, and in what areas the cards vary.

My thoughts on each shot:

G200: damn fine colours, pity about the texture res and dithering.
G400: looks good with high res textures, is it playable like that?
TNT2: eeek! where are my sunglasses!
ATI: you could almost cut yourself on those textures!
V3-3: washed out
Per3: washed out (looks damn close to the V3 shot don't you think?)

bah, bring on the NV10/Napalm!!

17th July 1999, 15:06
Is that G400 screenshot with all the graphic tweaks, where the other cards are not tweaked? I know that my G400 screenshots look nothing like that. In fact they are much closer to the TNT2 Ultra shots unless I stand in a particular spot where the pathway seems to clear up. I noticed that the TNT2 Ultra shot is in a slightly different position as well.

- DJ