Twinturbo vs Rage128

#1 Tue, 1 Dec 2015 - 15:28

I read somewhere the Rage128 is better than Twinturbo... I have the two card and I have tested it with my 7600/sonnetG3 (os9) and Macbench5: The TwinTurbo in some test is 10 or plus faster than Rage128!!!! Where is the truth?

#2 Tue, 1 Dec 2015 - 15:41

Rage 128 would have better support overall.

#3 Tue, 1 Dec 2015 - 21:53

In 2D tests (which I assume you are benchmarking eg. MacBench, Norton SysInfo), the TwinTurbo will be faster but it is all but useless for 3D. In 2D/3D card the Rage 128 will be better all round. The Radeon 7000 even better.

#4 Fri, 4 Dec 2015 - 22:00

Yes 2D benchmarks, MacBench5.0

For this vintage machines 2D speed is most important, 3D is optional...

Any way to have 1280x720 or 1360x768 resolution? Any hack or app? My lcd is native 1366x768 and the twinturbo have a vga connector.

I not even this resolutions with rage128...

#5 Sat, 5 Dec 2015 - 02:40

Newegg has a nice refurbished HP 19" lcd with 1280 x 1024 resolution for $50, $40 after rebate, right now. Why not just get an LCD that isn't widescreen? Widescreen makes no sense for office apps until it's so large it's a two page display. Of course if you only have space for one LCD, never mind.

#6 Sat, 5 Dec 2015 - 08:45

I have 4:3 monitors, but use it for Quadra and Amiga :beige:

The 16:9 is in addition and is good idea fit black borders

#7 Sat, 5 Dec 2015 - 14:50

< tangent >

trag said:
Widescreen makes no sense for office apps until it's so large it's a two page display.

Amen and add browsers to that. 1080 would be the bare minimum vertical resolution I'd consider using for a page display on the desktop, 1200 is just so much roomier. 768 on the NetBook panel is incredibly cramped by comparison.