> > Model 3's 3D system was developed jointly by Lockheed Martin's Real3D division
> > and Sega from the ground up (not a modified to fit system like Model 2) and it
> > was a *lot* more advanced than anything else at the time (a lot more advanced
> > than 3DFX)
> Actually the Model 3 chipset was first developed as a standalone graphics
> processor for high-end use. Lockheed sold it as a big box with a SCSI-2
> interface and a monitor connector for high-end visualization. That's why in
> Model 3 the CPU/sound (upper) board talks to the lower (3D) board via SCSI-2. A
> much less powerful derivative of that chipset became the Intel i740, for those
> who remember that :-)
slight correction, the Intel i740 is not a derivative of Real3D/Pro-1000. it was a freshly designed chip by Intel, Real3D and Chips & Technologies. it was a very low-cost chip in 1998, that could barely compete with Voodoo2, and was closer in performance to a Voodoo1, even though i740 was higher quality in features. i740 in practice was not even as good as the old pre-Real3D Martin Marietta/Fujitsu Model2 board. i740 had no geometry processor of its own, unlike Model 2 which had the Fujitsu DSPs and Model 3 which had geometry processors inside the Real3D/Pro-1000 GPUs.
In short, the i740 did use Real3D technologies, but not specifically a derivative of the Real3D/Pro-1000 used in Model 3. the analogy would be: General Motors: they make an older 1995 Corvette and a newer 1997 Chevy Cavolier. both cars use GM technologies, but one is far cheaper and has less performance than the other. the older higher-end car outperforms the newer lower-end car.
> And the textures are full color on both Model 2 and 3. The only thing "odd"
> about Model 2 relative to "modern" 3D is that it used quads (like Model 1 and
> Saturn) instead of triangles. Model 3 is a triangle machine however.