Slow 9700 Pro :-(

I've found that framerates in N2003 have DROPPED moving from this: AMD XP 2400 Ti 4200 512 Mb PC2100 DDR SiS 735 chipset to this: AMD XP 2400 Radeon 9700 Pro 512 Mb PC2700 DDR nForce2 chipset Any ideas? Regards, Mark http://www.markdavison.clara.net/OVAL/

Did you reformat and reinstall your operating system? Whether deliberate or not Nvidia drivers seem to change something that irreparably messes up ATI drivers even after they've been fully uninstalled. "Mark Davison" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (22 lines)

> I've found that framerates in N2003 have DROPPED moving from this: > > AMD XP 2400 > Ti 4200 > 512 Mb PC2100 DDR > SiS 735 chipset > > to this: > > AMD XP 2400 > Radeon 9700 Pro > 512 Mb PC2700 DDR > nForce2 chipset > > Any ideas? > > Regards, > > Mark > http://www.markdavison.clara.net/OVAL/ > >

"GBB" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:b52ep9$ico$[email hidden]... > Did you reformat and reinstall your operating system? Whether deliberateor > not Nvidia drivers seem to change something that irreparably messes up ATI > drivers even after they've been fully uninstalled. I'd heard this, too. It's a new setup that I've built - only an Audigy2, DVD drive and FrontX ports out of the old box, none of which are gonna affect performance. Regards, Mark

Mark Davison wrote:

Quoted text (20 lines)

> I've found that framerates in N2003 have DROPPED moving from this: > > AMD XP 2400 > Ti 4200 > 512 Mb PC2100 DDR > SiS 735 chipset > > to this: > > AMD XP 2400 > Radeon 9700 Pro > 512 Mb PC2700 DDR > nForce2 chipset > > Any ideas? > > Regards, > > Mark > http://www.markdavison.clara.net/OVAL/

Did you completely remove all references to the Nvidia card drivers and/or do a reformat? Have you downloaded and installed the latest Cat 3.2 drivers and control panel? Have you gone in and adjused your d3d or opengl settings ( I personally prefer d3d). Turned Vsynch off? I am running the 9700 Pro with an XP2400+ on an Nforce2 mb, and my d3d settings are on peformance, with 16X anistropic and 2X AA. Looks great, and I get framerates from 70-100 fps in N2003. Don Burnette

"Mark Davison" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (20 lines)

> I've found that framerates in N2003 have DROPPED moving from this: > > AMD XP 2400 > Ti 4200 > 512 Mb PC2100 DDR > SiS 735 chipset > > to this: > > AMD XP 2400 > Radeon 9700 Pro > 512 Mb PC2700 DDR > nForce2 chipset > > Any ideas? > > Regards, > > Mark > http://www.markdavison.clara.net/OVAL/

Reinstall windows. About the only hardware you can get away with swopping out with windows is a drive of some sort without having to reinstall windows i'm affraid. The very worst is a Creative Labs sound card or an ATI graphics card. Motherboards, GFX Cards, Sound Cards - they are all 100% MUST reinstall windows pieces of hardware. Doug

> Reinstall windows. Done (see reply above) FWIW: rendogl.ini from old setup (may have been with the 1800XP but the rest is as in my first post): [3D Accelerator Analysis] PolyRate=700.16 TestedFullScreen=1 TextureSetSize=84920016 BitsPerPixel=32 Height=960 Width=1280 AnisotropicLevel=8 UseStencilBuffer=0 MinFilter=9987 MagFilter=9729 Renderer=GeForce4 Ti 4200/AGP/3DNOW! Version=1.4.0 Vendor=NVIDIA Corporation rend_dxg.ini: [3D Accelerator Analysis] PolyRate=595.05 AnisotropicLevel=4 TextureSetSize=213909504 BitsPerPixel=32 TestedFullScreen=1 Height=960 Width=1280 vSyncMode=0 MipMapLODBias=-0.50 BestStampVOffset=0.50 BestStampUOffset=0.50 UseStencilBuffer=0 MipFilter=2 MinFilter=2 MagFilter=2 Renderer=nv4_disp.dll Version=Product 6 Version 13.10 Build 4109 Vendor=NVIDIA GeForce4 Ti 4200 And the new: OpenGL [3D Accelerator Analysis] PolyRate=1075.73 TestedFullScreen=1 TextureSetSize=166708944 BitsPerPixel=32 Height=960 Width=1280 AnisotropicLevel=16 UseStencilBuffer=0 MinFilter=9987 MagFilter=9729 Renderer=Radeon 9700 Pro x86/MMX/3DNow!/SSE Version=1.3.3604 WinXP Release Vendor=ATI Technologies Inc. D3D [3D Accelerator Analysis] PolyRate=600.45 AnisotropicLevel=8 TextureSetSize=165150720 BitsPerPixel=32 TestedFullScreen=1 Height=864 Width=1152 vSyncMode=0 MipMapLODBias=-0.50 BestStampVOffset=0.50 BestStampUOffset=0.50 UseStencilBuffer=0 MipFilter=2 MinFilter=2 MagFilter=2 Renderer=ati2dvag.dll Version=Product 6 Version 14.1 Build 6307 Vendor=RADEON 9700 PRO (resolution is different - was trying to up the framerates) I don't get it. Regards, Mark

"Doug Ellison" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:xA5da.528$[email hidden]... > Reinstall windows. Oh, and the either the DX9 install or the latest Radeon drivers lost me 800 3DMarks (2001) hmmmm.... Regards, Mark

The 3.2 Cats are only supposed to be 2-3% faster than the 3.1s. A real perf. boost is said to be coming with the 3.3s. I don't get it either. The nForce 2 is supposed to be cheaper/better/faster than the SiS 735. Could be DX9. Did you test before you installed 9? Unless you want to do another reinstall, you can't roll back to 8.1, altho there are several utils that claim you can.... "Mark Davison" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > "Doug Ellison" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:xA5da.528$[email hidden]... > > > Reinstall windows. > > Oh, and the either the DX9 install or the latest Radeon drivers lost me

800

Quoted text (9 lines)

> 3DMarks (2001) > > hmmmm.... > > Regards, > > Mark > >

"Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:ML8da.40234$[email hidden]... > The 3.2 Cats are only supposed to be 2-3% faster than the 3.1s. A real > perf. boost is said to be coming with the 3.3s. > > I don't get it either. The nForce 2 is supposed to becheaper/better/faster > than the SiS 735. Could be DX9. Did you test before you installed 9? > Unless you want to do another reinstall, you can't roll back to 8.1, altho > there are several utils that claim you can.... That's gonna be a last resort. I tried N2002 and have the same issues. After running the 3D config the game defaulted the detail settings to near max (only cars drawn in mirror was not set to it's maximum) so for some reason N2002 at setup point thought I had plenty horsepower. Knocking detail down to how I ran on the old 1800/SiS735/Ti4200 machine I'm getting at best equivalent performance. Definately noticably worse on 2400/nForce2/9700Pro than on 2400/SiS735/Ti4200. vsync, aniso and all other fancy filtering deals are off as far as I can tell. Can't see a way of *forcing* them off in the control panels, tho. Stumped. Regards, Mark Davison OVAL Deputy Admin Car #69 http://www.markdavison.clara.net/OVAL/

While I don't have an answer for you I can say something if Fubar. On my xp2100 cpu/ Leadtek Nforce2 mobo with a ATI9700 pro the NR2002 maxed everything out. The only thing left for me to adjust was 3d sound. Everything else was topped out. MadDAWG

Hey Mark..this is a little worrying... " ...vsync, aniso and all other fancy filtering deals are off as far as I can tell. Can't see a way of *forcing* them off in the control panels, tho..." The Ati Control Panel has very VERY clear options for altering/switching on and off these very settings.So if you are saying the above then you are doing something wrong.I have the 9700 Pro and like all Ati's it seems to have a tiered install of the drivers,the important one for you would be the Control Panel.You 'appear' to be lacking the Ati 'proper' control panel and are looking at a Windows/Ati/ANOther control panel. If you right click the desktop,choose Properties,then choose Settings tab,then click Advanced,now you should see ALOT of tabs,alot more than there ever were with Nvidia.The ones you need are the Direct3D and Open GL tabs.Once these are clicked you are into AA,Anistropic,Vsync altering territory,and even within these tabs there are other buttons to press for other settings. Whilst on these Direct3D and Open GL tabs you will see an option to Custom set up,this needs to be ticked/unticked and the sliders moved to 0/zero/off/nil etc etc for you to make your checks.The vsync option changed to always off for now.Default on all these will be Application Preference. Sorry if you have done all of this already but i would rather try and help with a load of slobber than read in 3 days it's all you needed to sort it. Good luck AD

If the frame rate is really REALLY screwed up (as in slide show), you might look to the sound card--frequently the culprit. It's not sharing an IRQ with the AGP, is it? Not sitting in the slot next to the AGP? Does the mouse stutter? Have you tried moving the sound to another slot? BIOS set to PnP OS? There's *gotta* be a logical answer.... "Mark Davison" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:ML8da.40234$[email hidden]... > > The 3.2 Cats are only supposed to be 2-3% faster than the 3.1s. A real > > perf. boost is said to be coming with the 3.3s. > > > > I don't get it either. The nForce 2 is supposed to be > cheaper/better/faster > > than the SiS 735. Could be DX9. Did you test before you installed 9? > > Unless you want to do another reinstall, you can't roll back to 8.1,

altho

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > there are several utils that claim you can.... > > That's gonna be a last resort. > > I tried N2002 and have the same issues. After running the 3D config the > game defaulted the detail settings to near max (only cars drawn in mirror > was not set to it's maximum) so for some reason N2002 at setup point

thought > I had plenty horsepower. > > Knocking detail down to how I ran on the old 1800/SiS735/Ti4200 machineI'm

Quoted text (16 lines)

> getting at best equivalent performance. Definately noticably worse on > 2400/nForce2/9700Pro than on 2400/SiS735/Ti4200. > > vsync, aniso and all other fancy filtering deals are off as far as I can > tell. Can't see a way of *forcing* them off in the control panels, tho. > > Stumped. > > Regards, > > Mark Davison > OVAL Deputy Admin > Car #69 > http://www.markdavison.clara.net/OVAL/ > >

This may be a bit of an usual advice, but knowing your mobo well, I just have to ask you - are you sure the CPU is running at the right speed at all? And the BIOS settings are all where they should be? This BIOS has surprised quite a few users by recognising their CPUs incorrectly, and also the BIOS settings especially in the Advanced Chipset setup may be way off from what would be optimal. I'm think especially of RAM timings, RAM sync settings and CPU timings. And you do have one of your DIMMs in slot 3 and the other in either 1 or 2 (as only this way you'll get the dual channel to work)? Achim "Mark Davison" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (22 lines)

> I've found that framerates in N2003 have DROPPED moving from this: > > AMD XP 2400 > Ti 4200 > 512 Mb PC2100 DDR > SiS 735 chipset > > to this: > > AMD XP 2400 > Radeon 9700 Pro > 512 Mb PC2700 DDR > nForce2 chipset > > Any ideas? > > Regards, > > Mark > http://www.markdavison.clara.net/OVAL/ > >

"Steve Smith"

Quoted text (14 lines)

>> >> vsync, aniso and all other fancy filtering deals are off as far as I >> can tell. Can't see a way of *forcing* them off in the control >> panels, tho. >> >> Stumped. >> >> Regards, >> >> Mark Davison >> OVAL Deputy Admin >> Car #69 >> http://www.markdavison.clara.net/OVAL/ >>

I know the original Nforce motherboards were real dogs. My first guess is that you got shipped an N1 board instead of an n2 version. So check that to verify you really do have the N2. Next make sure your onboard settings are disabled...sound and video. Next try getting a utility called coolbits to make sure your vsync is off in d3d. Also getting something comparable to Rivatuner for ATI(anybody know of a good tweek utility for 9700's?) Finally, I'd look both at your card and ingame anistrophic settings. I think I remember a thread where N2k2 defaulted to a rather high Ansio setting if it detected XX amount of vid ram, so maybe N2k3 is the same. Oops one other thing...make sure you eradicate all traces of the former Catalyst drivers before installing the latest..3.2's. Try to keep the driver confusion to a minimum. Good luck.

Dave....for once i see you giving duff advice ;) ATI drivers and their control panel comes with all you could get with tweaking software regarding vsync etc...and coolbits is for nvidia stuff isnt it..? My guy feeling is that Mark hasnt quite got to grips with Ati ways instead of Nvidia's ways.,but it will come. AD

Frame rates can't be compared if you don't detail every graphics option in NR2003. One little option check mark can drop fps by 30% for example. Marc "Don Burnette" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (37 lines)

> Mark Davison wrote: > > I've found that framerates in N2003 have DROPPED moving from this: > > > > AMD XP 2400 > > Ti 4200 > > 512 Mb PC2100 DDR > > SiS 735 chipset > > > > to this: > > > > AMD XP 2400 > > Radeon 9700 Pro > > 512 Mb PC2700 DDR > > nForce2 chipset > > > > Any ideas? > > > > Regards, > > > > Mark > > http://www.markdavison.clara.net/OVAL/ > > Did you completely remove all references to the Nvidia card drivers and/or > do a reformat? > Have you downloaded and installed the latest Cat 3.2 drivers and control > panel? > Have you gone in and adjused your d3d or opengl settings ( I personally > prefer d3d). > Turned Vsynch off? > > I am running the 9700 Pro with an XP2400+ on an Nforce2 mb, and my d3d > settings are on peformance, with 16X anistropic and 2X AA. > Looks great, and I get framerates from 70-100 fps in N2003. > > Don Burnette > >

"Aidee" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:b54oo3$o6m$[email hidden]: > Dave....for once i see you giving duff advice ;) Certainly NOT the first time!! !! !!!!! But I know the nividia card did not work well for me until AFTER I scrounged around and found all the 3dfx settings to delete. I'm assuming he has something similar going on migrating from Nvidia to ATI. And it's good to know ATI has all it's settings in plain view, not hidden like some of Nvidia's are. Thanks for the info. dave henrie

There is an ATI tweaker called Radeonator. It got as far as 2-final and 3-alpha before the author bailed. Find it here (among other locations): http://www.pcwelt.de/downloads/system/systemoptimierung/28204/ "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (21 lines)

> "Steve Smith" > >> > >> vsync, aniso and all other fancy filtering deals are off as far as I > >> can tell. Can't see a way of *forcing* them off in the control > >> panels, tho. > >> > >> Stumped. > >> > >> Regards, > >> > >> Mark Davison > >> OVAL Deputy Admin > >> Car #69 > >> http://www.markdavison.clara.net/OVAL/ > >> > I know the original Nforce motherboards were real dogs. My first guess > is that you got shipped an N1 board instead of an n2 version. So check > that to verify you really do have the N2. Next make sure your onboard > settings are disabled...sound and video. > Next try getting a utility called coolbits to make sure your vsync is > off in d3d. Also getting something comparable to Rivatuner for

ATI(anybody > know of a good tweek utility for 9700's?) > Finally, I'd look both at your card and ingame anistrophic settings.I > think I remember a thread where N2k2 defaulted to a rather high Ansio > setting if it detected XX amount of vid ram, so maybe N2k3 is the same. > Oops one other thing...make sure you eradicate all traces of the > former Catalyst drivers before installing the latest..3.2's. Try to keep > the driver confusion to a minimum. Good luck.

Best place for all things ATI is www.rage3d.com "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:hIoda.72073$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (24 lines)

> There is an ATI tweaker called Radeonator. It got as far as 2-final and > 3-alpha before the author bailed. Find it here (among other locations): > > http://www.pcwelt.de/downloads/system/systemoptimierung/28204/ > > > "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > "Steve Smith" > > >> > > >> vsync, aniso and all other fancy filtering deals are off as far as I > > >> can tell. Can't see a way of *forcing* them off in the control > > >> panels, tho. > > >> > > >> Stumped. > > >> > > >> Regards, > > >> > > >> Mark Davison > > >> OVAL Deputy Admin > > >> Car #69 > > >> http://www.markdavison.clara.net/OVAL/ > > >> > > I know the original Nforce motherboards were real dogs. My first

guess

Quoted text (13 lines)

> > is that you got shipped an N1 board instead of an n2 version. So check > > that to verify you really do have the N2. Next make sure your onboard > > settings are disabled...sound and video. > > Next try getting a utility called coolbits to make sure your vsync is > > off in d3d. Also getting something comparable to Rivatuner for > ATI(anybody > > know of a good tweek utility for 9700's?) > > Finally, I'd look both at your card and ingame anistrophic settings. > I > > think I remember a thread where N2k2 defaulted to a rather high Ansio > > setting if it detected XX amount of vid ram, so maybe N2k3 is the same. > > Oops one other thing...make sure you eradicate all traces of the > > former Catalyst drivers before installing the latest..3.2's. Try to

keep > > the driver confusion to a minimum. Good luck. > >

Um, or try here: http://www.radeonator.tk/ or here: http://gameguru.box.sk/ "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:hIoda.72073$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (24 lines)

> There is an ATI tweaker called Radeonator. It got as far as 2-final and > 3-alpha before the author bailed. Find it here (among other locations): > > http://www.pcwelt.de/downloads/system/systemoptimierung/28204/ > > > "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > "Steve Smith" > > >> > > >> vsync, aniso and all other fancy filtering deals are off as far as I > > >> can tell. Can't see a way of *forcing* them off in the control > > >> panels, tho. > > >> > > >> Stumped. > > >> > > >> Regards, > > >> > > >> Mark Davison > > >> OVAL Deputy Admin > > >> Car #69 > > >> http://www.markdavison.clara.net/OVAL/ > > >> > > I know the original Nforce motherboards were real dogs. My first

guess

Quoted text (13 lines)

> > is that you got shipped an N1 board instead of an n2 version. So check > > that to verify you really do have the N2. Next make sure your onboard > > settings are disabled...sound and video. > > Next try getting a utility called coolbits to make sure your vsync is > > off in d3d. Also getting something comparable to Rivatuner for > ATI(anybody > > know of a good tweek utility for 9700's?) > > Finally, I'd look both at your card and ingame anistrophic settings. > I > > think I remember a thread where N2k2 defaulted to a rather high Ansio > > setting if it detected XX amount of vid ram, so maybe N2k3 is the same. > > Oops one other thing...make sure you eradicate all traces of the > > former Catalyst drivers before installing the latest..3.2's. Try to

keep > > the driver confusion to a minimum. Good luck. > >

In that case, he wants Detonator Destroyer: http://www.guru3d.com/detonator-destroyer/ "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (12 lines)

> "Aidee" <[email hidden]> wrote in > news:b54oo3$o6m$[email hidden]: > > > Dave....for once i see you giving duff advice ;) > > Certainly NOT the first time!! !! !!!!! > But I know the nividia card did not work well for me until AFTER I > scrounged around and found all the 3dfx settings to delete. I'm assuming > he has something similar going on migrating from Nvidia to ATI. > And it's good to know ATI has all it's settings in plain view, not hidden > like some of Nvidia's are. Thanks for the info. > dave henrie

"Joachim Trensz" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:b54jo2$2588jv$[email hidden]... > This may be a bit of an usual advice, but knowing your mobo well, I just > have to ask you - are you sure the CPU is running at the right speed atall? > And the BIOS settings are all where they should be? This BIOS hassurprised > quite a few users by recognising their CPUs incorrectly, and also the BIOS > settings especially in the Advanced Chipset setup may be way off from what > would be optimal. I'm think especially of RAM timings, RAM sync settingsand > CPU timings. And you do have one of your DIMMs in slot 3 and the other in > either 1 or 2 (as only this way you'll get the dual channel to work)? CPU is *reported* as 2400 at startup so I presume that is correct. I'm using slots 3 and 2 for my RAM I know 3DMark means nothing in the sim world, but my scores went up an expected amount but N2002/2003 went down. :-( I am *so* confused. As far as AA etc as referred to in a previous post, I can see that I can tun off vsync, but the lowest manual settings for AA and Aniso is 2x so I leave that as Application Preference. Um... BTW thx for the help, everyone. Much better than the responses I've gotten from ATI specific groups... Regards, Mark Davison OVAL Deputy Admin Car #69 http://www.markdavison.clara.net/OVAL/

"Mark Davison" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > Knocking detail down to how I ran on the old 1800/SiS735/Ti4200 machineI'm > getting at best equivalent performance. Definately noticably worse on > 2400/nForce2/9700Pro than on 2400/SiS735/Ti4200. I'd say your cpu is the bottleneck. I run an Athlon 2800 with a 9700 Pro and my cpu is the bottleneck on my system for nr2003. -Tim

"Tim Miser" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (17 lines)

> "Mark Davison" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > > > Knocking detail down to how I ran on the old 1800/SiS735/Ti4200 machine > I'm > > getting at best equivalent performance. Definately noticably worse on > > 2400/nForce2/9700Pro than on 2400/SiS735/Ti4200. > > I'd say your cpu is the bottleneck. > > I run an Athlon 2800 with a 9700 Pro and my cpu is the bottleneck on my > system for nr2003. > > -Tim > > >

What kind of performance are you shooting for? My Athlon 1900XP (A7V333mb) with GF4 4400 runs satisfactorily (50-80fps) with almost all graphics turned on at 1024x768x16 in Direct3D mode.

AA and Aniso, if you've set the sliders to the left and chosen 'Performance' instead of 'Quality' should give you hardly any fps hit at all. That's what the 9700Pro is all about - you can use moderate AA and Aniso without much of an fps hit, as compared to Nvidia cards. Those two certainly aren't the culprit, unless you set them to 6x and 16x. I wouldn't expect Dx9 to reduce your 3dMarks, as it hasn't cost _me_ any speed. The March 12 Catalysts are known to cost you some points in 3dmark, but in turn to speed up games - nobody seems to know why but it seems to happen like this for everyone. How far have you gotten meanwhile following the advice you've received in terms of mobo drivers, installing the proper VGart, etc.? Your RAM is in the right slots, and if your CPU is recognised properly then you can't lose that much speed there anymore. You might want to make sure your AGP speed is set to 66, your CPU Interface is set to aggressive, and your RAM frequency has been set to Sync (or 100%, nomenclature differs in some BIOS versions) with your FSB (identical speed - this is faster than using asynchronous speeds). You might also want to check in the BIOS' Advanced Chipset settings whether FSB and CPU Multiplier are set correctly despite them being shown correctly at bootup - just to be sure. You might have to set System Performance and Memory Timings to 'User Defined' to be able to adjust the parameters manually. For all I know the 2400 comes with different FSB flavours (133 or 166 I think), so there is a slight chance of a potential mistake in this area and you should make sure it's all set correctly. I know it isn't very likely, but I'd check it to be sure. I assume you've made sure the in-game settings are identical to what they were under your GF4 when comparing the speeds? The Radeon loses a lot more fps with more cars displayed than the GF cards, and while the end result should still be faster than the GF's, this might be worth looking into. As a last resort - your 3dMark2001 IMHO looks very low overall. Hence, even if it's faster than your previous one, IMHO it should be around 15000 rather than around 12000. So, I'd hazard a guess that there is a slim chance your graphics card doesn't perform as it should. Have you checked the old graphics card in the new system, to see if the new system is also slower with the old graphics card? I wouldn't be too worried about clean installs and such (I've used the same Windows installation for 3 years, and even across motherboards with different chipsets, simply deleting the mobo branch in the system manager to force a re-recognition). If you deinstall the previous drivers properly in safe mode (does XP have that?) using Window's deinstaller feature, and explicitely make the graphics card a Default PCI VGA card before rebooting, you should be fine. You _were_ using WinXP on the old system as well, right? Is it possible that you've set up WinXP in a different way from before? That you've not used optimisations this time which you'd been using in the previous install? Achim "Mark Davison" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > "Joachim Trensz" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:b54jo2$2588jv$[email hidden]... > > This may be a bit of an usual advice, but knowing your mobo well, I just > > have to ask you - are you sure the CPU is running at the right speed at > all? > > And the BIOS settings are all where they should be? This BIOS has > surprised > > quite a few users by recognising their CPUs incorrectly, and also the

BIOS > > settings especially in the Advanced Chipset setup may be way off fromwhat > > would be optimal. I'm think especially of RAM timings, RAM sync settings > and > > CPU timings. And you do have one of your DIMMs in slot 3 and the otherin

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > either 1 or 2 (as only this way you'll get the dual channel to work)? > > CPU is *reported* as 2400 at startup so I presume that is correct. > I'm using slots 3 and 2 for my RAM > > I know 3DMark means nothing in the sim world, but my scores went up an > expected amount but N2002/2003 went down. :-( > > I am *so* confused. > > As far as AA etc as referred to in a previous post, I can see that I can

tun > off vsync, but the lowest manual settings for AA and Aniso is 2x so Ileave > that as Application Preference. > > Um... > > BTW thx for the help, everyone. Much better than the responses I'vegotten

Quoted text (10 lines)

> from ATI specific groups... > > Regards, > > Mark Davison > OVAL Deputy Admin > Car #69 > http://www.markdavison.clara.net/OVAL/ > >

"Joachim Trensz" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<b54jo2$2588jv$[email hidden]>...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> This may be a bit of an usual advice, but knowing your mobo well, I just > have to ask you - are you sure the CPU is running at the right speed at all? > And the BIOS settings are all where they should be? This BIOS has surprised > quite a few users by recognising their CPUs incorrectly, and also the BIOS > settings especially in the Advanced Chipset setup may be way off from what > would be optimal. I'm think especially of RAM timings, RAM sync settings and > CPU timings. And you do have one of your DIMMs in slot 3 and the other in > either 1 or 2 (as only this way you'll get the dual channel to work)?

OK - I think my mobo is hosed. I just noticed (duh!) that the system is only seeing 256 of my 512 Mb. I've tried both DIMMs individually in slot 3 and see 256, but use slots 3 + 2 (as recommended) or 3 + 1 and I *still* only see 256... :-( Wouldn't have thought 256Mb of RAM would've been a performance hit as opposed to 512 in N2003, though. I'm getting really pissed off. With a 5 week old daughter I get little enough time to practise for my league events, but this is taking up all my PC time. Let me just re-iterate my original problem - I'm *not* complaining that framarates are generally low, I'm confused as to why 2400XP/nForce2/9700Pro would perform *no better* than 1800XP/Sis735/Ti4200 in N2003 being that 3DMark scores have shot up about 25%. Mark

Dual Channel will increase fps by some - maybe 5%? I've never tried single channel. I'm not sure your mobo is truly hosed. Was the original package still sealed or had it been opened before? Maybe first check your BIOS / Advanced Chipset settings some more to see if perhaps the problem originates from a setting there. Also, you might want to check the mobo jumpers whether they're in the correct positions, and also the voltages (in the BIOS). Apart from that, which motherboard (make and type) and which BIOS version are you using? Which RAM (type, make) are you using? Are they both identical, or different types? As for your original issue, with identical detail and quality settings in card drivers and sim, the new system should be noticeably faster than the old one. Hard to tell by how much, as it depends on the settings you're using (remember, the ATI particularly shines with FSAA and Aniso enabled, and the higher the resolution gets). If you're not using AA or Aniso, or weren't using this on the old system, or if you're using fairly moderate resolutions, the difference will be less visible. But there should be a noticeable speed increase if only because of the more powerful CPU. You might want to try the forums on http://www.amdmb.com. There are forums for various mobo makers, and the audience there is pretty knowledgeable. Achim "Mark" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... ...

Quoted text (10 lines)

> OK - I think my mobo is hosed. > > I just noticed (duh!) that the system is only seeing 256 of my 512 Mb. > > I've tried both DIMMs individually in slot 3 and see 256, but use > slots 3 + 2 (as recommended) or 3 + 1 and I *still* only see 256... > :-( > > Wouldn't have thought 256Mb of RAM would've been a performance hit as > opposed to 512 in N2003, though.

...

"Joachim Trensz" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<b56l9j$26finb$[email hidden]>... > How far have you gotten meanwhile following the advice you've received in > terms of mobo drivers, installing the proper VGart, etc.? Nowhere as yet, but I noticed last night that there maybe a mobo problem - I can only see half my RAM!

Quoted text (14 lines)

> Your RAM is in the right slots, and if your CPU is recognised properly then > you can't lose that much speed there anymore. You might want to make sure > your AGP speed is set to 66, your CPU Interface is set to aggressive, and > your RAM frequency has been set to Sync (or 100%, nomenclature differs in > some BIOS versions) with your FSB (identical speed - this is faster than > using asynchronous speeds). You might also want to check in the BIOS' > Advanced Chipset settings whether FSB and CPU Multiplier are set correctly > despite them being shown correctly at bootup - just to be sure. > You might have to set System Performance and Memory Timings to 'User > Defined' to be able to adjust the parameters manually. For all I know the > 2400 comes with different FSB flavours (133 or 166 I think), so there is a > slight chance of a potential mistake in this area and you should make sure > it's all set correctly. I know it isn't very likely, but I'd check it to be > sure.

I'm pretty sure my BIOS setting are sound but may have a hardware issue as I noted above :( > I assume you've made sure the in-game settings are identical to what they > were under your GF4 when comparing the speeds? The Radeon loses a lot more > fps with more cars displayed than the GF cards, and while the end result > should still be faster than the GF's, this might be worth looking into. Now THIS is interesting! I was unaware of this and am gutted if true. I do all my tests at back of grid at Daytona with *all cars ahead* drawn. N2002: On the 1800/Ti4200 with no reflections min fps is 30. Putting the XP2400 in the same rig allowed me to turn on relections and not drop below 29fps. This is running OpenGL. Without reflections on the new kit (2400/nForce2/9700Pro) min fps is just below 40 with same settings. Switch on reflections and I drop to 24fps! If I can run N2002/2003 all cars ahead, 5 cars behind, full detail cars (with reflections) and world, medium mirrors, 12 sounds heard, 100% draw distance at 1280x960 and *never* drop below 30 fps I am happy. I was so nearly there with the 2400/SiS/Ti4200 I thought I'd be happy as a pig in sh!t moving to nForce2 and 9700 Pro... I can live without the fancy shadow business in N2003, but thought that I *might* have gotten to add shadows onto (but not into) cars. > As a last resort - your 3dMark2001 IMHO looks very low overall. Hence, even > if it's faster than your previous one, IMHO it should be around 15000 rather > than around 12000. So, I'd hazard a guess that there is a slim chance your > graphics card doesn't perform as it should. Have you checked the old > graphics card in the new system, to see if the new system is also slower > with the old graphics card? I'm tempted.

Quoted text (11 lines)

> I wouldn't be too worried about clean installs and such (I've used the same > Windows installation for 3 years, and even across motherboards with > different chipsets, simply deleting the mobo branch in the system manager to > force a re-recognition). If you deinstall the previous drivers properly in > safe mode (does XP have that?) using Window's deinstaller feature, and > explicitely make the graphics card a Default PCI VGA card before rebooting, > you should be fine. > > You _were_ using WinXP on the old system as well, right? Is it possible that > you've set up WinXP in a different way from before? That you've not used > optimisations this time which you'd been using in the previous install?

Yes I was using mildly teaked XP home but I found that any tweaks I tried had precisely zero noticale effect. Perhaps the same tweaks *will* be noticable on the new kit... This whole area is moot until I find out whether I have a hardware fault - which sadly I think looks likely... Regards, and thanks for the in-depth, considered response, Mark

[email hidden]

Quoted text (7 lines)

> Let me just re-iterate my original problem - I'm *not* complaining > that framarates are generally low, I'm confused as to why > 2400XP/nForce2/9700Pro would perform *no better* than > 1800XP/Sis735/Ti4200 in N2003 being that 3DMark scores have shot up > about 25%. > > Mark

Ok, let me take a shot at this. At lower resolutions, anything under say..12x9 the 9700 & GF4 cards are pretty close. The real difference only shows up when you hit the 16x12 resolutions and enable some smoothvisiona and ansio...the GF4 collapses while the ATI doesn't suffer such a dramatic framerate loss. You are not gaining a whole lot of speed, but you should be able to pile on the features at a much higher rate than GF4 cards can handle. Try 1200x900 and crank on extra smoothvision and ansio...you shouldn't see too much of a drop in fps...(not having owned one yet though, I can't say for sure.) dave henrie

Mark, I'd try D3D. For me, with the Radeon, D3D is a tad faster in N2k3, especially when the fancier graphics features are ON. Or at least, D3D's minimum fps is higher than OpenGL's. Good luck with your mobo, I hope it's not defective. Achim "Mark" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > "Joachim Trensz" <[email hidden]> wrote in messagenews:<b56l9j$26finb$[email hidden]>... > > How far have you gotten meanwhile following the advice you've receivedin > > terms of mobo drivers, installing the proper VGart, etc.? > > Nowhere as yet, but I noticed last night that there maybe a mobo > problem - I can only see half my RAM! > > > Your RAM is in the right slots, and if your CPU is recognised properlythen > > you can't lose that much speed there anymore. You might want to makesure > > your AGP speed is set to 66, your CPU Interface is set to aggressive,and > > your RAM frequency has been set to Sync (or 100%, nomenclature differsin > > some BIOS versions) with your FSB (identical speed - this is faster than > > using asynchronous speeds). You might also want to check in the BIOS' > > Advanced Chipset settings whether FSB and CPU Multiplier are setcorrectly > > despite them being shown correctly at bootup - just to be sure. > > You might have to set System Performance and Memory Timings to 'User > > Defined' to be able to adjust the parameters manually. For all I knowthe > > 2400 comes with different FSB flavours (133 or 166 I think), so there isa > > slight chance of a potential mistake in this area and you should makesure > > it's all set correctly. I know it isn't very likely, but I'd check it tobe > > sure. > > I'm pretty sure my BIOS setting are sound but may have a hardware > issue as I noted above :( > > > I assume you've made sure the in-game settings are identical to whatthey > > were under your GF4 when comparing the speeds? The Radeon loses a lotmore

Quoted text (25 lines)

> > fps with more cars displayed than the GF cards, and while the end result > > should still be faster than the GF's, this might be worth looking into. > > Now THIS is interesting! I was unaware of this and am gutted if true. > I do all my tests at back of grid at Daytona with *all cars ahead* > drawn. > > N2002: On the 1800/Ti4200 with no reflections min fps is 30. Putting > the XP2400 in the same rig allowed me to turn on relections and not > drop below 29fps. This is running OpenGL. > Without reflections on the new kit (2400/nForce2/9700Pro) min fps is > just below 40 with same settings. Switch on reflections and I drop to > 24fps! > > If I can run N2002/2003 all cars ahead, 5 cars behind, full detail > cars (with reflections) and world, medium mirrors, 12 sounds heard, > 100% draw distance at 1280x960 and *never* drop below 30 fps I am > happy. > I was so nearly there with the 2400/SiS/Ti4200 I thought I'd be happy > as a pig in sh!t moving to nForce2 and 9700 Pro... > > I can live without the fancy shadow business in N2003, but thought > that I *might* have gotten to add shadows onto (but not into) cars. > > > As a last resort - your 3dMark2001 IMHO looks very low overall. Hence,

even > > if it's faster than your previous one, IMHO it should be around 15000rather > > than around 12000. So, I'd hazard a guess that there is a slim chanceyour

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > graphics card doesn't perform as it should. Have you checked the old > > graphics card in the new system, to see if the new system is also slower > > with the old graphics card? > > I'm tempted. > > > I wouldn't be too worried about clean installs and such (I've used the

same > > Windows installation for 3 years, and even across motherboards with > > different chipsets, simply deleting the mobo branch in the systemmanager to > > force a re-recognition). If you deinstall the previous drivers properlyin > > safe mode (does XP have that?) using Window's deinstaller feature, and > > explicitely make the graphics card a Default PCI VGA card beforerebooting, > > you should be fine. > > > > You _were_ using WinXP on the old system as well, right? Is it possiblethat

Quoted text (13 lines)

> > you've set up WinXP in a different way from before? That you've not used > > optimisations this time which you'd been using in the previous install? > > Yes I was using mildly teaked XP home but I found that any tweaks I > tried had precisely zero noticale effect. Perhaps the same tweaks > *will* be noticable on the new kit... > > This whole area is moot until I find out whether I have a hardware > fault - which sadly I think looks likely... > > Regards, and thanks for the in-depth, considered response, > > Mark

I run at 1280x960x32 with 6xFSAA and 16x Ansio and the lowest my framerate goes is about 28 fps with all details maxed except the non-vehicle shadows. If I turn off 6xFSAA, 16x Ansio and lower the resolution to 1024x768 with all the same in game eye candy turned on, I'll still get about 30-35 fps at the lowest which is evidence that my cpu is the limiting factor. -Tim "4-X-CHAMP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:b55rp3$3oc$[email hidden]... > > "Tim Miser" <[email hidden]> wrote in messagenews:[email hidden]... > > "Mark Davison" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > > > > > Knocking detail down to how I ran on the old 1800/SiS735/Ti4200machine

Quoted text (15 lines)

> > I'm > > > getting at best equivalent performance. Definately noticably worse on > > > 2400/nForce2/9700Pro than on 2400/SiS735/Ti4200. > > > > I'd say your cpu is the bottleneck. > > > > I run an Athlon 2800 with a 9700 Pro and my cpu is the bottleneck on my > > system for nr2003. > > > > -Tim > > > > > > > What kind of performance are you shooting for? > My Athlon 1900XP (A7V333mb) with GF4 4400 runs satisfactorily (50-80fps)

with almost all graphics turned on at 1024x768x16 in > Direct3D mode. > >

"Mark" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Let me just re-iterate my original problem - I'm *not* complaining > that framarates are generally low, I'm confused as to why > 2400XP/nForce2/9700Pro would perform *no better* than > 1800XP/Sis735/Ti4200 in N2003 being that 3DMark scores have shot up > about 25%. OK, I'm confused! In your first post you said: quote> I've found that framerates in N2003 have DROPPED moving from this: AMD XP 2400 Ti 4200 512 Mb PC2100 DDR SiS 735 chipset to this: AMD XP 2400 Radeon 9700 Pro 512 Mb PC2700 DDR nForce2 chipset <endquote But now you are saying you upgraded the cpu too?

Agree totally. The Radeon is hopeless as an OpenGL card. It's D3D or the highway.... "Joachim Trensz" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:b57i0s$25vu7f$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (32 lines)

> Mark, > > I'd try D3D. For me, with the Radeon, D3D is a tad faster in N2k3, > especially when the fancier graphics features are ON. Or at least, D3D's > minimum fps is higher than OpenGL's. > > Good luck with your mobo, I hope it's not defective. > > Achim > > > > "Mark" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > "Joachim Trensz" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:<b56l9j$26finb$[email hidden]>... > > > How far have you gotten meanwhile following the advice you've received > in > > > terms of mobo drivers, installing the proper VGart, etc.? > > > > Nowhere as yet, but I noticed last night that there maybe a mobo > > problem - I can only see half my RAM! > > > > > Your RAM is in the right slots, and if your CPU is recognised properly > then > > > you can't lose that much speed there anymore. You might want to make > sure > > > your AGP speed is set to 66, your CPU Interface is set to aggressive, > and > > > your RAM frequency has been set to Sync (or 100%, nomenclature differs > in > > > some BIOS versions) with your FSB (identical speed - this is faster

than

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > > using asynchronous speeds). You might also want to check in the BIOS' > > > Advanced Chipset settings whether FSB and CPU Multiplier are set > correctly > > > despite them being shown correctly at bootup - just to be sure. > > > You might have to set System Performance and Memory Timings to 'User > > > Defined' to be able to adjust the parameters manually. For all I know > the > > > 2400 comes with different FSB flavours (133 or 166 I think), so there

is > a > > > slight chance of a potential mistake in this area and you should make > sure > > > it's all set correctly. I know it isn't very likely, but I'd check itto

Quoted text (11 lines)

> be > > > sure. > > > > I'm pretty sure my BIOS setting are sound but may have a hardware > > issue as I noted above :( > > > > > I assume you've made sure the in-game settings are identical to what > they > > > were under your GF4 when comparing the speeds? The Radeon loses a lot > more > > > fps with more cars displayed than the GF cards, and while the end

result > > > should still be faster than the GF's, this might be worth lookinginto.

Quoted text (30 lines)

> > > > Now THIS is interesting! I was unaware of this and am gutted if true. > > I do all my tests at back of grid at Daytona with *all cars ahead* > > drawn. > > > > N2002: On the 1800/Ti4200 with no reflections min fps is 30. Putting > > the XP2400 in the same rig allowed me to turn on relections and not > > drop below 29fps. This is running OpenGL. > > Without reflections on the new kit (2400/nForce2/9700Pro) min fps is > > just below 40 with same settings. Switch on reflections and I drop to > > 24fps! > > > > If I can run N2002/2003 all cars ahead, 5 cars behind, full detail > > cars (with reflections) and world, medium mirrors, 12 sounds heard, > > 100% draw distance at 1280x960 and *never* drop below 30 fps I am > > happy. > > I was so nearly there with the 2400/SiS/Ti4200 I thought I'd be happy > > as a pig in sh!t moving to nForce2 and 9700 Pro... > > > > I can live without the fancy shadow business in N2003, but thought > > that I *might* have gotten to add shadows onto (but not into) cars. > > > > > As a last resort - your 3dMark2001 IMHO looks very low overall. Hence, > even > > > if it's faster than your previous one, IMHO it should be around 15000 > rather > > > than around 12000. So, I'd hazard a guess that there is a slim chance > your > > > graphics card doesn't perform as it should. Have you checked the old > > > graphics card in the new system, to see if the new system is also

slower

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > > with the old graphics card? > > > > I'm tempted. > > > > > I wouldn't be too worried about clean installs and such (I've used the > same > > > Windows installation for 3 years, and even across motherboards with > > > different chipsets, simply deleting the mobo branch in the system > manager to > > > force a re-recognition). If you deinstall the previous drivers

properly

Quoted text (7 lines)

> in > > > safe mode (does XP have that?) using Window's deinstaller feature, and > > > explicitely make the graphics card a Default PCI VGA card before > rebooting, > > > you should be fine. > > > > > > You _were_ using WinXP on the old system as well, right? Is it

possible > that > > > you've set up WinXP in a different way from before? That you've notused > > > optimisations this time which you'd been using in the previousinstall?

Quoted text (13 lines)

> > > > Yes I was using mildly teaked XP home but I found that any tweaks I > > tried had precisely zero noticale effect. Perhaps the same tweaks > > *will* be noticable on the new kit... > > > > This whole area is moot until I find out whether I have a hardware > > fault - which sadly I think looks likely... > > > > Regards, and thanks for the in-depth, considered response, > > > > Mark > >

"Tim Miser" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > OK, I'm confused! In your first post you said: Understandable! Here's what I did... I *knew* I was gonna build a 2400 based system and sell my 1800. For laughs I got the cpu first and swapped out the 1800 to see what benefits I would get. As of now I have two base units on the go: 2400/nF2/2700DDR/4200 1800/SiS/2100DDR/Ti4200 Well, just to confuse matters I swapped the RAM between the PCs! More on why later... I've done some testing tonight... At the same detail levels @1280x960x32 no AA or Aniso and no controllers attached I took fps readings at back of grid at Daytona. First reading is what I get immediately on joining, second is lowest I see. D3D, no reflections: 1800 - 44/31 2400 - 60/42 (nice jump) D3D, with reflections 1800 - 33/25 2400 - 43/33 (Still an OK leap) So far so cool. Here's the bit that hurts, tho: XP1800/Ti4200 OpenGL, no reflections: 55/40 (all of a sudden that performance leap looks mediocre) XP1800/Ti4200 OpenGL, with reflections: 44/34 (BETTER than D3D on the 2400!!!!!) OpenGL on the Radeon is so bad as to not be worth mentioning. OK I will: XP2400/9700Pro OpenGL, with reflections: 29/21 SO - bottom lne is I actually acheive BETTER framerates out of an 1800/Ti4200 than I do with a 2400/9700Pro. So what if D3D is faster by an expected amount if a Ti4200 can essentially embarrass a 9700Pro in OpenGL... Sad. On the hardware fault front (mentioned earlier in the thread)... I swapped out the PC2100 RAM from the 1800 and put it in the 2400. Voila! 512 Mb seen by Windows! Put the PC2700 RAM in the 1800 and I see 512Mb. Hmmmm.... Swap the RAM back to how it should be and go back to only seeing 256Mb in the 2400!!! AAARRRRGGGHHHH!!!!! I reseated it time and again to no avail. I think I'm gonna cry :-( Regards, Mark Davison OVAL Deputy Admin Car #69 http://www.markdavison.clara.net/OVAL/

Hi Mark, the ATI shines when you turn on something like 4xAA and 8xAniso. It shouldn't lose much fps, whereas the GF's fps would drop considerably. I've run the same test but with 4xAA and 8xAniso enabled, plus all graphics options set to ON or Maximum Quality in N2k2 plus 20 sounds played and 3d Audio enabled, and all settings optimised for maximum quality in the driver's control panel, and I'm getting a steady 29fps while all cars are still standing on the grid (goes up as soon as the first cars start moving). In N2k3 I'm getting a steady 36fps under the same conditions, everything in the sim ON and set to maximum quality, including 3d sound as above, except On-Car shadows and Track Specular Highlights. Hence, I'd say there's still room for improvement on your system, it isn't running at its full potential yet. Maybe it's really a bad mobo. But I'd first try and update the BIOS. D3D btw isn't faster everywhere on the ATI - in IL2-Forgotten Battles for example, both OpenGL and D3d are perfectly identically fast on my system. Also note that once the cars start moving, the ATI should outrun the GF substantially pretty soon. Achim "Mark Davison" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... ...

Quoted text (10 lines)

> Here's the bit that hurts, tho: > XP1800/Ti4200 OpenGL, no reflections: > 55/40 (all of a sudden that performance leap looks mediocre) > > XP1800/Ti4200 OpenGL, with reflections: > 44/34 (BETTER than D3D on the 2400!!!!!) > > OpenGL on the Radeon is so bad as to not be worth mentioning. OK I will: > XP2400/9700Pro OpenGL, with reflections: > 29/21

"Joachim Trensz" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:b58dmm$26jbb3$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> Hi Mark, > > the ATI shines when you turn on something like 4xAA and 8xAniso. It > shouldn't lose much fps, whereas the GF's fps would drop considerably. > > Hence, I'd say there's still room for improvement on your system, it isn't > running at its full potential yet. Maybe it's really a bad mobo. But I'd > first try and update the BIOS.

Thanks, mate! Here's an update: Was running NoAA/Aniso for above benchmarks. Running 2x/2x on 9700Pro is a nice image improvement for a 1fps hit - so that's a positive! My hardware fault is definately a bad DIMM. It would seem that my old system is less fussy with borderline memory as it can see it, but the new rig can simply not recognize it at all. Will not boot up if I use only the bad DIMM. I got a private mail from someone who said that *without changing [i]any[/i] kit* they boosted their 3Dmark scores by 2000 by changng the order in which they installed drivers and directx. Anyone heard of this? It certainly would appear that there's something going on in these games that benefits the nVidia cards. Either that or nVidia's openGL implimentation is far superior. Oh well - I'm feeling a little less desperate than I was. Regards, Mark Davison OVAL Deputy Admin Car #69 http://www.markdavison.clara.net/OVAL/

Hi Mark, nForce2 boards are indeed picky when it comes to RAM. Luckily RAM prices aren't too high right now. As for the driver install order, I once gained 2 or 3 fps by deinstalling the Nvidia stuff in Windows' Safe Mode instead of in normal mode, so I'm inclined to believe that by doing a perfect install you can speed things up a bit. But I don't think someone could get a boost of 2000 in 3dmark unless something had gone seriously wrong during the previous install. OTOH, if he says so, it may be possible. As for your system, you've compared the two systems under the conditions most unfavourable for the new system. If you'd compared them with 4xFSAA and 8xAniso enabled, and with maybe just 20 cars ahead, or maybe with 42 cars displayed ahead but during the race instead of on the grid, things would have looked much different. But, the ATI clearly has its weaknesses as well, this cannot be denied. I don't know why OpenGL is slower in N2k3 than D3D, as in IL2-FB for example they're identically fast for me. Maybe it has to do with Papy's implementation as well. But, I think that indeed Nvidia's OpenGL implementation is very mature and helps make their older cards look somewhat better (faster) as compared to ATI than they really are. The ATI drivers in general I think cause a somewhat higher CPU hit than the Nvidia drivers, so ATI gets better with faster CPUs. It has to be noted, though, that ATI seems to really take the driver development serious at the moment. They keep releasing new driver versions about every 6 weeks, a clear indication that they're working hard on optimising their drivers. I'm sure with time ATI drivers will reach the maturity of Nvidia's drivers, and they aren't too far from it right now either. Maybe also check the forums at http://www.rage3d.com. This seems to pretty much be _the_ ATI knowledge ressource on the net right now. Achim "Mark Davison" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... ... > Running 2x/2x on 9700Pro is a nice image improvement for a 1fps hit - so > that's a positive! > > My hardware fault is definately a bad DIMM. It would seem that my old > system is less fussy with borderline memory as it can see it, but the new > rig can simply not recognize it at all. Will not boot up if I use onlythe > bad DIMM. > > I got a private mail from someone who said that *without changing[i]any[/i] > kit* they boosted their 3Dmark scores by 2000 by changng the order inwhich

Quoted text (7 lines)

> they installed drivers and directx. Anyone heard of this? > > It certainly would appear that there's something going on in these games > that benefits the nVidia cards. Either that or nVidia's openGL > implimentation is far superior. > > Oh well - I'm feeling a little less desperate than I was.

I agree with Achim: the ATIs work better with faster CPUs (and at higher rez'). I've swapped back & forth between D3D and OpenGL in GPL on an ATI machine, and the D3D frame-rate was half of what it was under OpenGL. Of course, that's with a measly 1.3 Athlon and a game optimized for OpenGL (even tho it took almost 3 years for WillHerr's dll hack to get OpenGL to work properly). "Joachim Trensz" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:b59f9t$264gd3$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> Hi Mark, > > nForce2 boards are indeed picky when it comes to RAM. Luckily RAM prices > aren't too high right now. > > As for the driver install order, I once gained 2 or 3 fps by deinstalling > the Nvidia stuff in Windows' Safe Mode instead of in normal mode, so I'm > inclined to believe that by doing a perfect install you can speed things

up > a bit. But I don't think someone could get a boost of 2000 in 3dmarkunless > something had gone seriously wrong during the previous install. OTOH, ifhe > says so, it may be possible. > > As for your system, you've compared the two systems under the conditions > most unfavourable for the new system. If you'd compared them with 4xFSAAand > 8xAniso enabled, and with maybe just 20 cars ahead, or maybe with 42 cars > displayed ahead but during the race instead of on the grid, things would > have looked much different. But, the ATI clearly has its weaknesses aswell, > this cannot be denied. > > I don't know why OpenGL is slower in N2k3 than D3D, as in IL2-FB forexample > they're identically fast for me. Maybe it has to do with Papy's > implementation as well. But, I think that indeed Nvidia's OpenGL > implementation is very mature and helps make their older cards looksomewhat > better (faster) as compared to ATI than they really are. > > The ATI drivers in general I think cause a somewhat higher CPU hit thanthe

Quoted text (24 lines)

> Nvidia drivers, so ATI gets better with faster CPUs. > > It has to be noted, though, that ATI seems to really take the driver > development serious at the moment. They keep releasing new driver versions > about every 6 weeks, a clear indication that they're working hard on > optimising their drivers. I'm sure with time ATI drivers will reach the > maturity of Nvidia's drivers, and they aren't too far from it right now > either. > > Maybe also check the forums at http://www.rage3d.com. This seems to pretty > much be _the_ ATI knowledge ressource on the net right now. > > Achim > > > > "Mark Davison" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > ... > > Running 2x/2x on 9700Pro is a nice image improvement for a 1fps hit - so > > that's a positive! > > > > My hardware fault is definately a bad DIMM. It would seem that my old > > system is less fussy with borderline memory as it can see it, but the

new

Quoted text (17 lines)

> > rig can simply not recognize it at all. Will not boot up if I use only > the > > bad DIMM. > > > > I got a private mail from someone who said that *without changing > [i]any[/i] > > kit* they boosted their 3Dmark scores by 2000 by changng the order in > which > > they installed drivers and directx. Anyone heard of this? > > > > It certainly would appear that there's something going on in these games > > that benefits the nVidia cards. Either that or nVidia's openGL > > implimentation is far superior. > > > > Oh well - I'm feeling a little less desperate than I was. > >

"Joachim Trensz" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:b59f9t$264gd3$[email hidden]... Just wanted to say thankyou to one and all. Regards, Mark Davison OVAL Deputy Admin Car #69 http://www.markdavison.clara.net/OVAL/