Whatever happened to 3DFX?

Back in '96, 3DFX ruled the computer gaming industry. People gobbled
up those old Voodoo cards, which had been the first true
commercial-level graphics accelerators. Voodoo cards enjoyed great
success, even though it wasn't a standalone card (you needed a
separate card to handle 2D applications). Anyway, lotsa people
thought that the competition, Direct3D-based graphics cards, were the
red-headed stepchild of the 3D gaming community.

Then came Voodoo2, and it was even more popular than the original
Voodoo cards. I *did* start having doubts though, when 3DFX started
peddling that whacky technology of hooking up two Voodoo 2's together
in the same computer. That was just plain dumb. Regardless, 3DFX
practically had a monopoly on the 3D videor cards for the computer
gaming industry. 3DFX was to computer graphics as much as Creative
Labs was to computer soundcards.

Then came Voodoo3, and that just fell flat on its face. It enjoyed
very mild success, but by then *everyone* knew that 3DFX was about to
fall off the face of the earth. By the time the much-hyped Voodoo3
came around, they were barely toe-to-toe with NVidia's Direct3D cards.
After Voodoo3, all subsequent releases from 3DFX became a
laughingstock in the industry.

So what went wrong? Was Microsoft's backing of Direct3D technology
simply too much for 3DFX to overcome? Or was it because 3DFX got too
comfortable sitting atop of its perch in 1997? Or perhaps the
management at 3DFX just made one horrendous decision after another,
resulting in a catastrophic downfall bigger than anything I've seen in
the computer industry? If you were to tell PC gamers in 1997 that
3DFX will be practically defunct in less than 5 years' time, they
would've laughed at your face.

"Opticreep" wrote in message
m...
Back in '96, 3DFX ruled the computer gaming industry. People gobbled
up those old Voodoo cards, which had been the first true
commercial-level graphics accelerators. Voodoo cards enjoyed great
success, even though it wasn't a standalone card (you needed a
separate card to handle 2D applications). Anyway, lotsa people
thought that the competition, Direct3D-based graphics cards, were the
red-headed stepchild of the 3D gaming community.

Then came Voodoo2, and it was even more popular than the original
Voodoo cards. I *did* start having doubts though, when 3DFX started
peddling that whacky technology of hooking up two Voodoo 2's together
in the same computer. That was just plain dumb. Regardless, 3DFX
practically had a monopoly on the 3D videor cards for the computer
gaming industry. 3DFX was to computer graphics as much as Creative
Labs was to computer soundcards.

Then came Voodoo3, and that just fell flat on its face. It enjoyed
very mild success, but by then *everyone* knew that 3DFX was about to
fall off the face of the earth. By the time the much-hyped Voodoo3
came around, they were barely toe-to-toe with NVidia's Direct3D cards.
After Voodoo3, all subsequent releases from 3DFX became a
laughingstock in the industry.

So what went wrong? Was Microsoft's backing of Direct3D technology
simply too much for 3DFX to overcome? Or was it because 3DFX got too
comfortable sitting atop of its perch in 1997? Or perhaps the
management at 3DFX just made one horrendous decision after another,
resulting in a catastrophic downfall bigger than anything I've seen in
the computer industry? If you were to tell PC gamers in 1997 that
3DFX will be practically defunct in less than 5 years' time, they
would've laughed at your face.


Bad management making bad decisions. As simple as that...

On 18 Aug 2004 21:35:09 -0700, (Opticreep) wrote:

Back in '96, 3DFX ruled the computer gaming industry. People gobbled
up those old Voodoo cards, which had been the first true
commercial-level graphics accelerators. Voodoo cards enjoyed great
success, even though it wasn't a standalone card (you needed a
separate card to handle 2D applications). Anyway, lotsa people
thought that the competition, Direct3D-based graphics cards, were the
red-headed stepchild of the 3D gaming community.

Then came Voodoo2, and it was even more popular than the original
Voodoo cards. I *did* start having doubts though, when 3DFX started
peddling that whacky technology of hooking up two Voodoo 2's together
in the same computer. That was just plain dumb. Regardless, 3DFX
practically had a monopoly on the 3D videor cards for the computer
gaming industry. 3DFX was to computer graphics as much as Creative
Labs was to computer soundcards.

Then came Voodoo3, and that just fell flat on its face. It enjoyed
very mild success, but by then *everyone* knew that 3DFX was about to
fall off the face of the earth. By the time the much-hyped Voodoo3
came around, they were barely toe-to-toe with NVidia's Direct3D cards.
After Voodoo3, all subsequent releases from 3DFX became a
laughingstock in the industry.

So what went wrong? Was Microsoft's backing of Direct3D technology
simply too much for 3DFX to overcome? Or was it because 3DFX got too
comfortable sitting atop of its perch in 1997? Or perhaps the
management at 3DFX just made one horrendous decision after another,
resulting in a catastrophic downfall bigger than anything I've seen in
the computer industry? If you were to tell PC gamers in 1997 that
3DFX will be practically defunct in less than 5 years' time, they
would've laughed at your face.


Voodoo3 did not "fall flat on it's face". It sold very well to end
users, just not to the OEM system builders. Who for some reason
abandoned 3dfx and went with Nvidia's TNT line, despite it's lack of
Glide support. While 3dfx stuck with 16-bit color, the TNT line had
32-bit color support, but was not powerful enough to actually use it
in games. I never understood why a theoretical but useless 32-bit
color feature beat actual game compatibility in the minds of OEMs, but
it did.

SLI was not "wacky" technology, in fact it's coming back with the
advent of the PCI Express standard.

Voodoo5 was late, but was not a "laughingstock". It was out in front
of the competition in features like FSAA. It was not as fast as the
GeForce, but it was "fast enough" for games of the period. It did not
have hardware T&L support, but at that time T&L was just a marketing
feature.

The long-awaited "Rampage" series was virtually finished but 3dfx died
before it could be marketed.

Basically, the 3dfx story is one of horrible mismanagment combined
with cutthroat competition = doom. I personally consider 3dfx to be
more dishonest than Enron, as an investor who lost thousands in both.
3dfx management swore everything was okay, and they were not going to
sell out to Nvidia, about a month before they did exactly that. It
wasn't even a sell-out, it was a "take-under" where shareholders got
nothing. They ran the ship aground, scuttled it, and then got bonuses
and free jobs at Nvidia. How can it be legal to run a company into
the ground, get a severance bonus, and then go to work for the
competition? Alex Leupp = Trojan Horse?

# Opticreep
Back in '96, 3DFX ruled the computer gaming industry. People gobbled
up those old Voodoo cards, which had been the first true
commercial-level graphics accelerators. Voodoo cards enjoyed great
success, even though it wasn't a standalone card (you needed a
separate card to handle 2D applications). Anyway, lotsa people
thought that the competition, Direct3D-based graphics cards, were the
red-headed stepchild of the 3D gaming community.

Then came Voodoo2, and it was even more popular than the original
Voodoo cards. I *did* start having doubts though, when 3DFX started
peddling that whacky technology of hooking up two Voodoo 2's together
in the same computer. That was just plain dumb. Regardless, 3DFX
practically had a monopoly on the 3D videor cards for the computer
gaming industry. 3DFX was to computer graphics as much as Creative
Labs was to computer soundcards.

Then came Voodoo3, and that just fell flat on its face. It enjoyed
very mild success, but by then *everyone* knew that 3DFX was about to
fall off the face of the earth. By the time the much-hyped Voodoo3
came around, they were barely toe-to-toe with NVidia's Direct3D cards.
After Voodoo3, all subsequent releases from 3DFX became a
laughingstock in the industry.

So what went wrong? Was Microsoft's backing of Direct3D technology
simply too much for 3DFX to overcome? Or was it because 3DFX got too
comfortable sitting atop of its perch in 1997? Or perhaps the
management at 3DFX just made one horrendous decision after another,
resulting in a catastrophic downfall bigger than anything I've seen in
the computer industry? If you were to tell PC gamers in 1997 that
3DFX will be practically defunct in less than 5 years' time, they
would've laughed at your face.


The voodoo 3 had a cool advertising campaign - "What if everything was
as powerful as Voodoo 3?" with a picture of a girl with her head blown
off by her hair dryer

--
Toby

# N

I still have that old 3Dfx TV ad (video clip) of the scientists
working for a computer chip which will be used to make a better world
(environment etc.), when suddenly their boss announces "We'll drop
that environmental stuff and use the chip for video games instead.
Back to work.". That was a hilarious ad. Wonder where 3Dfx would be
today if they had stuck to the environmental stuff? The moon???

Hah! Yeah, forgot about that one - what's the filename so I can search
for it?

--
Toby

zmike6 wrote:

On 18 Aug 2004 21:35:09 -0700, (Opticreep) wrote:

Back in '96, 3DFX ruled the computer gaming industry. People gobbled
up those old Voodoo cards, which had been the first true
commercial-level graphics accelerators. Voodoo cards enjoyed great
success, even though it wasn't a standalone card (you needed a
separate card to handle 2D applications). Anyway, lotsa people
thought that the competition, Direct3D-based graphics cards, were the
red-headed stepchild of the 3D gaming community.

Then came Voodoo2, and it was even more popular than the original
Voodoo cards. I *did* start having doubts though, when 3DFX started
peddling that whacky technology of hooking up two Voodoo 2's together
in the same computer. That was just plain dumb. Regardless, 3DFX
practically had a monopoly on the 3D videor cards for the computer
gaming industry. 3DFX was to computer graphics as much as Creative
Labs was to computer soundcards.

Then came Voodoo3, and that just fell flat on its face. It enjoyed
very mild success, but by then *everyone* knew that 3DFX was about to
fall off the face of the earth. By the time the much-hyped Voodoo3
came around, they were barely toe-to-toe with NVidia's Direct3D cards.
After Voodoo3, all subsequent releases from 3DFX became a
laughingstock in the industry.

So what went wrong? Was Microsoft's backing of Direct3D technology
simply too much for 3DFX to overcome? Or was it because 3DFX got too
comfortable sitting atop of its perch in 1997? Or perhaps the
management at 3DFX just made one horrendous decision after another,
resulting in a catastrophic downfall bigger than anything I've seen in
the computer industry? If you were to tell PC gamers in 1997 that
3DFX will be practically defunct in less than 5 years' time, they
would've laughed at your face.


Voodoo3 did not "fall flat on it's face". It sold very well to end
users, just not to the OEM system builders. Who for some reason
abandoned 3dfx and went with Nvidia's TNT line, despite it's lack of
Glide support. While 3dfx stuck with 16-bit color, the TNT line had
32-bit color support, but was not powerful enough to actually use it
in games. I never understood why a theoretical but useless 32-bit
color feature beat actual game compatibility in the minds of OEMs, but
it did.

Consider another possibility. Suppose the board manufacturers had contracts
with those OEMs to deliver boards. Suppose after 3DFX pulled the rug out
from under them they only way they could fulfill those contracts was to go
with a chip that they could get, of which the TNT was the best of the lot.
Seems to me that under that circumstance the OEMs would have the choice of
voiding a contract with the associated legal hassles and starting up with a
new vendor which had no track record as a board manufacturer or going with
the flow and accepting a product with less performance than one based on
3DFX.

SLI was not "wacky" technology, in fact it's coming back with the
advent of the PCI Express standard.

Dunno, personally the PCI Express version seems pretty whacky to me,
especially considering that it's not going to actually work until at least
one more generation of chipsets has shipped.

Voodoo5 was late, but was not a "laughingstock". It was out in front
of the competition in features like FSAA. It was not as fast as the
GeForce, but it was "fast enough" for games of the period. It did not
have hardware T&L support, but at that time T&L was just a marketing
feature.

If 3DFX was on top when Voodoo5 shipped then "fast enough" might have been
good enough. But when they were already in trouble it wasn't going to put
them back in the game.

The long-awaited "Rampage" series was virtually finished but 3dfx died
before it could be marketed.

Basically, the 3dfx story is one of horrible mismanagment combined
with cutthroat competition = doom. I personally consider 3dfx to be
more dishonest than Enron, as an investor who lost thousands in both.
3dfx management swore everything was okay, and they were not going to
sell out to Nvidia, about a month before they did exactly that. It
wasn't even a sell-out, it was a "take-under" where shareholders got
nothing. They ran the ship aground, scuttled it, and then got bonuses
and free jobs at Nvidia. How can it be legal to run a company into
the ground, get a severance bonus, and then go to work for the
competition? Alex Leupp = Trojan Horse?

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Opticreep wrote:

Back in '96, 3DFX ruled the computer gaming industry. People gobbled
up those old Voodoo cards, which had been the first true
commercial-level graphics accelerators. Voodoo cards enjoyed great
success, even though it wasn't a standalone card (you needed a
separate card to handle 2D applications). Anyway, lotsa people
thought that the competition, Direct3D-based graphics cards, were the
red-headed stepchild of the 3D gaming community.

Then came Voodoo2, and it was even more popular than the original
Voodoo cards. I *did* start having doubts though, when 3DFX started
peddling that whacky technology of hooking up two Voodoo 2's together
in the same computer. That was just plain dumb. Regardless, 3DFX
practically had a monopoly on the 3D videor cards for the computer
gaming industry. 3DFX was to computer graphics as much as Creative
Labs was to computer soundcards.

Then came Voodoo3, and that just fell flat on its face. It enjoyed
very mild success, but by then *everyone* knew that 3DFX was about to
fall off the face of the earth. By the time the much-hyped Voodoo3
came around, they were barely toe-to-toe with NVidia's Direct3D cards.
After Voodoo3, all subsequent releases from 3DFX became a
laughingstock in the industry.

So what went wrong? Was Microsoft's backing of Direct3D technology
simply too much for 3DFX to overcome? Or was it because 3DFX got too
comfortable sitting atop of its perch in 1997? Or perhaps the
management at 3DFX just made one horrendous decision after another,
resulting in a catastrophic downfall bigger than anything I've seen in
the computer industry? If you were to tell PC gamers in 1997 that
3DFX will be practically defunct in less than 5 years' time, they
would've laughed at your face.

Just so you know, 3DFX was not "practically defunct in 5 years time", it was
totally defunct in 3 years time--the remains were sold to nvidia in
December, 2000--it stuck around for a while as the various formalities
necessary to complete that deal were gone through, but as of that time it
was dead as a business.

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

On 18 Aug 2004 21:35:09 -0700, (Opticreep) wrote:

That was just plain dumb. Regardless, 3DFX
practically had a monopoly on the 3D videor cards for the computer
gaming industry.

Rendition Verite was the first to support Quake. It gave 3DFX a run
for their money, so there was no monopoly. I had a Verite (Sierra
"Screamin 3d", and then a Verite 2 (Diamond Viper s220) before going
to the Voodoo Banshee (never liked the inelegant two-card solution).
jw

zmike6 wrote in message . ..
Basically, the 3dfx story is one of horrible mismanagment combined
with cutthroat competition = doom. I personally consider 3dfx to be
more dishonest than Enron, as an investor who lost thousands in both.
3dfx management swore everything was okay, and they were not going to
sell out to Nvidia, about a month before they did exactly that. It
wasn't even a sell-out, it was a "take-under" where shareholders got
nothing. They ran the ship aground, scuttled it, and then got bonuses
and free jobs at Nvidia. How can it be legal to run a company into
the ground, get a severance bonus, and then go to work for the
competition? Alex Leupp = Trojan Horse?

Why would 3DFX want to buy a graphics card company and no longer allow
other graphics card companies to use their chips since Voodoo3, was
something that always interested me. I thought the downward spiral of
3DFX actually began at that point.

On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 05:54:15 GMT, zmike6
wrote:

in games. I never understood why a theoretical but useless 32-bit
color feature beat actual game compatibility in the minds of OEMs, but
it did.

Like OEMS are looking at those specs when building systems. nVidia
gave them a better price than 3DFX... that's all.