rec.autos.simulators

by **MadDAW** » Thu, 11 Dec 2003 01:12:11

I have an ATI 9700 Pro on a Nforce2 based system and it runs quite well. I
did have some issues with the latest Nforce drivers, but it wasn't a video
releated problem. I'm acutaly running a slower cpu than you are (2100xp),
but the Nforce1 chipsets are not as good as the Nforce2. You still should
be able to get simular/better performance. When I went from a GF3 to the
9700pro I turned down the screen res and turned up/on FSAA and AF. I get
better fps and a better image. I blame that more on my CPU than anything.
These big dawg cards need a lot of CPU to push them to thier limits.

MadDAWG

by **Jeff** » Thu, 11 Dec 2003 02:28:17

Well total format complete fresh install of everything. But still no
performance gain. I'm gonna stick with the 4200. For this game, and my
system, it is much better than the 9800. You guy's may be right afterall
about the MB. But I get 36 fps full field drawn at the start (never
dropping below that), quincunx aa, and detail set to mostly max in the in
game setup. So it's not a need of an upgrade, the game plays great, I was
just hoping for a easy performance gain. Thanks for all the help guys.

Jeff

----- Original Message -----

Newsgroups: rec.autos.simulators
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 10:47 PM
Subject: Re: 9800 problem

> On Mon, 8 Dec 2003 19:44:42 -0500, "Eric Leblanc"

> >Get a new mobo then....:-)

> >EL

> He's right. Get the newest of the new, pop an 8x card in there, and
> then set the BIOS to 4x AGP. Unless you're running de*** apps that
> test specific D3D functions (AGP swapping) you're going to lose no
> more than 1% of your speed, if even that. 8x is nearly meaningless
> from a performance perspective.

> -Slash
> --
> "Ebert Victorious"

> On Mon, 8 Dec 2003 19:44:42 -0500, "Eric Leblanc"

> >Get a new mobo then....:-)

> >EL

> He's right. Get the newest of the new, pop an 8x card in there, and
> then set the BIOS to 4x AGP. Unless you're running de*** apps that
> test specific D3D functions (AGP swapping) you're going to lose no
> more than 1% of your speed, if even that. 8x is nearly meaningless
> from a performance perspective.

> -Slash
> --
> "Ebert Victorious"
> -The Onion

by **Eric Leblan** » Thu, 11 Dec 2003 03:30:18

Jeff, one thing i for sure The ATI cards have presently a technological edge
over NVDIA and you should have MUCH nicer graphics with a ATI. Since i have
my ATI 9700 pro i don't bother with FPS anymore in Nascar 2003 if they are
over 40-50 FPS they are very smooth and i would probably not see the
difference between 50 and 100. One other thing i notice when i went from a
Geforce 3 to a ATI 9700 pro si that for the same smooth graphics NVDIA was
showing higher FPS. For exemple at 40 FPS with the ATI graphics were has
smooth has running at least 80 with the Geforce.

I have a friend who had the same thing happen to him. Change for a much
faster card but speed were the same with is Ti card. He finally changed mobo
and everything went double the speed, no, that is incorrect, it went 4 times
nicer :-)

EL

> Well total format complete fresh install of everything. But still no
> performance gain. I'm gonna stick with the 4200. For this game, and my
> system, it is much better than the 9800. You guy's may be right afterall
> about the MB. But I get 36 fps full field drawn at the start (never
> dropping below that), quincunx aa, and detail set to mostly max in the in
> game setup. So it's not a need of an upgrade, the game plays great, I was
> just hoping for a easy performance gain. Thanks for all the help guys.

> Jeff

> ----- Original Message -----

> Newsgroups: rec.autos.simulators
> Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 10:47 PM
> Subject: Re: 9800 problem

> > On Mon, 8 Dec 2003 19:44:42 -0500, "Eric Leblanc"

> > >Get a new mobo then....:-)

> > >EL

> > He's right. Get the newest of the new, pop an 8x card in there, and
> > then set the BIOS to 4x AGP. Unless you're running de*** apps that
> > test specific D3D functions (AGP swapping) you're going to lose no
> > more than 1% of your speed, if even that. 8x is nearly meaningless
> > from a performance perspective.

> > -Slash
> > --
> > "Ebert Victorious"

> > On Mon, 8 Dec 2003 19:44:42 -0500, "Eric Leblanc"

> > >Get a new mobo then....:-)

> > >EL

> > He's right. Get the newest of the new, pop an 8x card in there, and
> > then set the BIOS to 4x AGP. Unless you're running de*** apps that
> > test specific D3D functions (AGP swapping) you're going to lose no
> > more than 1% of your speed, if even that. 8x is nearly meaningless
> > from a performance perspective.

> > -Slash
> > --
> > "Ebert Victorious"
> > -The Onion

by **Larr** » Thu, 11 Dec 2003 06:19:54

Pretty much what I saw...

-Larry

> > > I just installed a 9800 128mb non-pro in my computer. I was going to
> > > replace my gf 4200 because I was able to get the ATI card for $199.
I
> > > uninstalled the Nvidia drivers and then installed the standard vga
> drivers
> > > prior to installing the 9800. I plugged the card in and then
installed
> > the
> > > latest Omega drivers. All seemed to go well. I then benchmarked
using
> > > 3dmark2001se. With my GF 4200 128mb I got around 10000. With the
Omega
> > > drivers and the 9800 I got 12398. I thought this seemed a little low.
> I
> > > then went to play NASCAR 2003 with D3D, I left my previous in game
> > settings
> > > alone so I could get a good comparison. Where I was getting 36 fps
with
> > the
> > > GF 4200 in ogl, I was now getting 34 ogl, and 28 D3D with the 9800. I
> > know
> > > this cannot be right. Looking at the benchmarks and reading
information
> > on
> > > different sites, it should be much faster.
> > > In the ATI control panel I had left many of the options in the
middle
> > or
> > > on the low side as far as AA goes. I had to change AGP to 4x form 1x.
> I
> > > turned vsync to always off. I had write fast on and off with no
> > difference.

> > Were you running AA and AF on the Nvidia card? With the ATI cards, you
> > still see a hit in FPS with AA and AF on, but it's not nearly as large
as
> it
> > is on the Nvidia cards (pre-FX at least). My guess is you weren't using
> > either before. Try setting and AA and AF to Application Preference and
> see
> > what happens.

> > Alan

> I went from a GF4400 to a 9800 Pro and, in some sims (e.g. N2003) the
frame
> rates actually went down a bit but the image quality improved a lot. In
the
> GF you can turn off AA and AF completely where as in the 9800 I don't know
> how to do it (I can just set it to the minimum).

> I would risk saying that "application controlled" AA and AF does no always
> work as expected.

> Nevertheless it is very much worth the change because the new look is much
> better!

> JG

by **Larr** » Thu, 11 Dec 2003 06:21:19

Well.... not really.

AGP transfers don't even come into play unless you use up all 128MB on the
card, and I'm not sure NR2003 does that.

Even so, AGP transfer rates have never been shown to be the pinnacle of
performance measurements.

In other words, it don't matter much.

-Larry

> If your mobo is not AGP 8x don't expect a big difference. Get a new mobo.

> EL

> > I just installed a 9800 128mb non-pro in my computer. I was going to
> > replace my gf 4200 because I was able to get the ATI card for $199. I
> > uninstalled the Nvidia drivers and then installed the standard vga
drivers
> > prior to installing the 9800. I plugged the card in and then installed
> the
> > latest Omega drivers. All seemed to go well. I then benchmarked using
> > 3dmark2001se. With my GF 4200 128mb I got around 10000. With the Omega
> > drivers and the 9800 I got 12398. I thought this seemed a little low.
I
> > then went to play NASCAR 2003 with D3D, I left my previous in game
> settings
> > alone so I could get a good comparison. Where I was getting 36 fps with
> the
> > GF 4200 in ogl, I was now getting 34 ogl, and 28 D3D with the 9800. I
> know
> > this cannot be right. Looking at the benchmarks and reading information
> on
> > different sites, it should be much faster.
> > In the ATI control panel I had left many of the options in the middle
> or
> > on the low side as far as AA goes. I had to change AGP to 4x form 1x.
I
> > turned vsync to always off. I had write fast on and off with no
> difference.
> > I then thought maybe it was the Omega drivers, so I downloaded the cat
> 3.9.
> > No changes except my benchmark dropped into the 11500 range. I even
> changed
> > the power connector thinking it might have something to do with it.
This
> is
> > very disappointing. I was really looking forward to this card.
According
> > to Tom's Hardware it should roughly be twice as fast as my gf4200. This
> is
> > my second attempt with ATI, when I was replacing my gf3 I tried a 9500
> pro.
> > It also was slower than my gf3. I am willing to try a few more things,
> but
> > quite honestly I'm not sure what else there is to do. I tried running
> > Detonator RIP but I just get some error message, I think because I had
> > already uninstalled the drivers. About a week ago I loaded the latest
MB
> > drivers, so my system is up to date. I'm not sure that would be it
anyway,
> > my system works fine with the 4200. I could really use some help with
> this
> > one. I know my way around the pc pretty well, I'm just not familiar
with
> > ATI. Thanks for reading.

> > P.S. I am also going to post this in the ATI group.

> > MSI NForce 1 Motherboard
> > 512 mb ram
> > wd 40 gb hd
> > onboard 5.1 sound
> > XP 2400+
> > Windows XP Home

by **rms** » Fri, 12 Dec 2003 04:10:44

You never tried raising the AGP voltage a notch on the 9800?

rms