S3 engineers claimed that the S3TL engine had feature parity with GeForce , and that it could render 2. S3 refined the chip, fixing hardware bugs and streamlining the chip for both cost reduction and performance. Unfortunately for S3, deliveries of the Savage3D were hampered by poor manufacturing yields. The driver problems were still there. In early , S3 retired the Savage3D and released the Savage4 family.
|Date Added:||4 January 2014|
|File Size:||22.70 Mb|
|Operating Systems:||Windows NT/2000/XP/2003/2003/7/8/10 MacOS 10/X|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
S3 Graphics graphics processors. The driver problems were still there. Many of the Savage3D’s limitations were addressed by the Savage 4 chipset. At the same time, the Savage was to be the second consumer level graphics chipset of this generation to feature an on-board hardware transform and lighting engine that would help to off-load some of the transform and lighting calculations from the CPU and onto the graphics card. Unfortunately for S3, deliveries of the Savage3D were hampered by poor manufacturing yields.
VIA Technologies x86 processors. Once again, the product, on paper, appeared to be a very capable competitor. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Poor drivers resulting in poor compatibility and poor performance notice a trend?
Drivers were again an issue with S3’s product; holding back overall performance and causing compatibility issues with software and hardware. Views Read Edit View history. Sign up now Username Password Remember Me. In this respect at least, S3’s economical use of transistors proved highly advantageous.
The mobile version was going to be called AlphaChrome but was otherwise completely identical. The Savage Savabe was the 86×410 chip announced by the regrouped S3 in S3 would regroup in later years and create the Chrome series. It causes missing textures, errors in geometry and models, and minimal performance benefits.
Linux Kernel Driver DataBase: CONFIG_FB_SAVAGE: S3 Savage support
Only the high-quality texture capability from its S3TC support gave it good mind share with the gaming community. S3 designed these chips for notebooks, but they were also sold as budget AGP svaage cards. Index On Paper 0. Savage4 was an evolution of Savage 3D technology in many ways. The compressed textures were a vast improvement over the standard textures used on all other cards. Unfortunately, the final shipping product was nothing more than a buggy disappointment. Not only that, but S3TC allowed these much higher quality textures to be rendered with negligible performance impact.
CONFIG_I2C_SAVAGE4: S3 Savage 4
sxvage Savage4 supported the then-new AGP 4X although at the older 3. Only one major board-vendor, Hercules, made any real effort to ship a Savage3D product.
It was never sold, only prototypes exist. No other manufacturer would even dream of spending so much time and effort on offering a single video chipset, and thus most manufacturers dropped their Savage 3D products, including Diamond 2000, a name that would later hold much significance for the company.
86C410 S3 SAVAGE2000
Whether the issues are a result of poor drivers or defective hardware is unknown. A key sign of improvement was in the fact that Diamond Multimedia, a major player that had dropped their original Savage 3D product, was now supporting the Savage4. Combined with poor drivers and the chip’s lack of multitexturing support, the Savage3D failed in the market.
However, by continuing with a bandwidth-constraining bit memory bus, S3 guaranteed this graphics card would never be a performance part under bit color.
In earlyS3 retired the Savage3D and released the Savage4 family. Development of Savage as a discrete card was discontinued. Unfortunately S3TL does not function properly. S3 engineers claimed that the S3TL engine had feature parity with GeForceand that it could render 2. Then came the Savage4 injust about an entire year after the release of the Savage 3D, and the market wondered if we were due for another unpleasant surprise from the once dominant S3.