Yes.
Eldred
--
http://www.racesimcentral.net/~epickett
Screamers League
IICC League
GPLRank -6.0 MoGPL rank +267.80
Ch.Rank +52.58 MoC +741.71
Hist. +82.34 MoH:na
N2k3 rank:in progress
Slayer Spektera lvl 72 assassin
Slayer Spectral_K lvl 38 Necro
US East
I am, but you don't need to futz with AGP settings to run e-mail and Microsoft
Office...
Eldred
--
http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
Screamers League
IICC League
GPLRank -6.0 MoGPL rank +267.80
Ch.Rank +52.58 MoC +741.71
Hist. +82.34 MoH:na
N2k3 rank:in progress
Slayer Spektera lvl 72 assassin
Slayer Spectral_K lvl 38 Necro
US East
I just d/l'd Powerstrip. According to it, the AGP setting is at 2x.
Eldred
--
http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
Screamers League
IICC League
GPLRank -6.0 MoGPL rank +267.80
Ch.Rank +52.58 MoC +741.71
Hist. +82.34 MoH:na
N2k3 rank:in progress
Slayer Spektera lvl 72 assassin
Slayer Spectral_K lvl 38 Necro
US East
I looked through all the NVidia settings, and it wasn't there. I found it by
running Powerstrip. It was at 2x, so I'll try 4x.
I'll see what I can do... :-)
Eldred
--
http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
Screamers League
IICC League
GPLRank -6.0 MoGPL rank +267.80
Ch.Rank +52.58 MoC +741.71
Hist. +82.34 MoH:na
N2k3 rank:in progress
Slayer Spektera lvl 72 assassin
Slayer Spectral_K lvl 38 Necro
US East
4x didn't help(4632 3Dmark). Oh well, thanks for trying.
Eldred
--
http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
Screamers League
IICC League
GPLRank -6.0 MoGPL rank +267.80
Ch.Rank +52.58 MoC +741.71
Hist. +82.34 MoH:na
N2k3 rank:in progress
Slayer Spektera lvl 72 assassin
Slayer Spectral_K lvl 38 Necro
US East
4X AGP setting shoudln't really matter much at all if you believe what the
tuners sitghs say about AGP speed. I guess they are correct.
> >I looked through all the NVidia settings, and it wasn't there. I found it by
> >running Powerstrip. It was at 2x, so I'll try 4x.
> 4x didn't help(4632 3Dmark). Oh well, thanks for trying.
Is there any chance of testing this video card in a system that is not
built and maintained by you ?
Yeah, I know I'm implying that you don't know your way around a computer
:-), but we all have our own way of doing things that we believe is the
correct way of doing things, and while I have a fair bit of experience
in building computers, I'm sure that some people in here would go "What
does he do that for ???" if they checked out one of my rigs, and would
prolly be right too
Why don't I buy the defective vid car theory ?
Well, a Ti4600 should easily score more than 4300(ish) in a 1.2 Athlon,
and while there's a remote possibility that the card is defective and
simply not performing up to par, why would it then score better on the
XP1800 ?
The performance increase from the 1.2 to the XP1800 is about what you'd
expect % wise, and it seems very strange that a card that is performing
below par on a 1.2 would score better on a faster CPU on a test that is
more demanding on the vid card than on the CPU, but then again computers
often defy logic....that's why it would be interesting to see what this
vid card would do elsewhere....or maybe the other way around, would it
be possible for you to borrow another vid card to test ?
Speaking of other vid cards, what vid card did you have in your studio
PC, is it powerful enough to run some tests ?
Beers and cheers
(uncle) Goy
"goyl at nettx dot no"
http://www.theuspits.com
"A man is only as old as the woman he feels........"
--Groucho Marx--
I have a Dell Optiplex GX150 borrowed from work that I could test it on.
No offense taken. Given the problems I've had, it's actually *entirely*
possible I've screwed something up. Although a standard install shouldn't
result in a system that's THIS far off where it should be... Seems like short
of defective hardware, you'd have to make an EFFORT to get the system to run
this slowly.
More overhead with a faster CPU?
The other card is a GF4MX440. I'm running 3dmark on it now. The software
didn't work on it before, but I discovered that the system didn't have D3D
acceleration enabled. I found that out when I tried to get the Ti4600 to work.
Neither 3dmark nor GTR would work before that.
Ok, the test just finished. 3704 benchmark with the MX440 and Athlon 1800XP.
Does that sound about right?
I'll also try the MX440 in the 1.2 system, as well as my old V5.
Eldred
--
http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
Screamers League
IICC League
GPLRank -6.0 MoGPL rank +267.80
Ch.Rank +52.58 MoC +741.71
Hist. +82.34 MoH:na
N2k3 rank:in progress
Slayer Spektera lvl 72 assassin
Slayer Spectral_K lvl 38 Necro
US East
I just tried my MX440 in the 1800XP system.
3dmark 3704
GTR wouldn't run. Crashed to desktop before it got to the track.
F1C:
San Marino - 34
Spa - 38
Not sure why there was such a big difference between the tracks with the
Ti4600, but not with the MX440...
--
http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
Screamers League
IICC League
GPLRank -6.0 MoGPL rank +267.80
Ch.Rank +52.58 MoC +741.71
Hist. +82.34 MoH:na
N2k3 rank:in progress
Slayer Spektera lvl 72 assassin
Slayer Spectral_K lvl 38 Necro
US East
> I have a Dell Optiplex GX150 borrowed from work that I could test it on.
Some viruses run constantly in the background eating up CPU resources, I
had one customer complaining about her system being slow as a turtle, it
had 7 different viruses and one of them was running constantly in the
background running her CPU at 100% no matter what
True.....but if the vid card is the limiting factor then more CPU
overhead shouldn't give you a 25% increase, I know for instance that my
*** rig is vid card limited, increasing the CPU speed from the stock
3.2 to 3.8 only gives me a few hundred points in 3Mark01, oh well, just
ponderings on my part
Yeah....that sounds fairly close, I'd say that should score in the
3500-4500 range and would be fairly similar on both systems as it will
be the limiting factor
It will be interesting to see...
Beers and cheers
(uncle) Goy
"goyl at nettx dot no"
http://www.racesimcentral.net/
"A man is only as old as the woman he feels........"
--Groucho Marx--
>> I have a Dell Optiplex GX150 borrowed from work that I could test it on.
>I'd give it a go there too
Virus checked, ad-aware checked, spybot checked. A brand new install on a
different HD yielded the same numbers. I'm *very* confident it isn't a virus
causing the slowness.
I tweaked the BIOS a bit, and got a 5300 or so benchmark. I set it to the 'top
performance' setting. I'll still try the other cards in my old system.
Eldred
--
http://www.racesimcentral.net/~epickett
Screamers League
IICC League
GPLRank -6.0 MoGPL rank +267.80
Ch.Rank +52.58 MoC +741.71
Hist. +82.34 MoH:na
N2k3 rank:in progress
Slayer Spektera lvl 72 assassin
Slayer Spectral_K lvl 38 Necro
US East
Actually, what type of chipset does your motherboard use, Eldred? I've
just read that VIA chipsets can severly slow down any 3dmark scores
because their northbridge memory controllers are only single DDR,
whereas SIS and Intel offer dual controllers.
--
Peter Ives (AKA Pete Ivington)
Remove ALL_STRESS before replying via email
If you know what's good for you, don't listen to me :)
GPLRank Joystick -50.63 Wheel -25.01
VIA, recent drivers. I think someone else had the same board though, and had a
better benchmark number.
Eldred
--
http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
Screamers League
IICC League
GPLRank -6.0 MoGPL rank +267.80
Ch.Rank +52.58 MoC +741.71
Hist. +82.34 MoH:na
N2k3 rank:in progress
Slayer Spektera lvl 72 assassin
Slayer Spectral_K lvl 38 Necro
US East
> VIA, recent drivers. I think someone else had the same board though,
> and had a better benchmark number.
> Eldred
I had a Athlon 1800XP with a VIA KT-133A based motherboard that was
getting horrid framerates in just about everything. You said earlier
that you had updated the VIA 4in1 drivers, I actually found it nearly
impossible to install the AGP drivers, they'd make nearly every game
using D3D crash. Until the game did crash though (usually took a
couple of minutes of gameplay), I was seeing a 3x speed increase.
Running OpenGL in NR2003 helped, but in GPL I got complete video
corruption, so that wasn't an option either.
After just endless annoyance, I finally ditched the mobo and got a KT333
based one instead, despite my misgivings over VIA-based chipsets. I
went from about ~5,500 3DMark2001 scores to over 10,000. 4in1
installed fine, and things ran nicely. GTR2002 and the like still
struggled at high detail settings, but they ran great with some of the
effects turned down.
I got the distinct impression from some of those that I talked to that
some of the KT-133A chipsets were a little dodgy, and that I happened to
get ahold of one of those. I honestly can't see a motherboard upgrade
without changing the CPU or the video card making the difference it did
without a screwy motherboard in the first place.
Since then, I stuck a Radeon 9800 Pro in there, which has been nice, but
I still got very acceptable framerates with the GF4 Ti4200 that I had in
there.
I realize this is a horrid suggestion when you want to avoid spending
money, but a decent mobo isn't supremely expensive. While I'm no
expert at building systems, I can hold my own when it comes to my
hardware, and the KT-133A setup was nearly the death of me. I haven't
regretted getting away from it since I did it.
'Course, if you don't have a KT-133A chipset, then completely ignore the
post you just read ;)
