Author Topic: EXTREMELY DISSAPOINTED (Read 1238 times)

Pand · « **on:** November 09, 2001, 12:08:00 AM »

I just bought a new system.
Here's the specs:

AMD 1800+XP CPU
ECS K7S5A Motheboard
512MB DDR PC2100
Evga NVidia GEFORCE2 MX 64MB
Windows 2000

In aces high, I get the same framerate that I used to get with my old
Pentium 800mhz with Asus Geforce2 MX 32MB. It sure seems like a hell of a waste of money. Any suggestions? I did a benchmark test through 3dMARK2001 and I only got 1294 3dmarks. This is disturbing.

Please HELP! What can I do to fix THIS??

Regards,

Justin (Pand)

mrsid2 · « **Reply #1 on:** November 09, 2001, 12:58:00 AM »

Make sure you have VIA 4in1 drivers installed if you have a VIA chipset board. I'm not familiar with the one you have..

Secondly, set bios settings to optimal - can boost your performance quite much. Get a program called nvreffix from fileplanet - that enables you to get normal refresh rates in games with W2k. Otherwise your game refresh will be stuck in 60hz - ouch! That's due to a bug in all nvidia w2k drivers.

Third: What do you expect idgit?

You spend $800 to your system and leave it crippled by the $30 display card..

Get a geforce3 Ti200 (if you can't afford it, you just wasted a lot of dough for nothing in terms of game performance..)

My system with 1.4Gig amd + gf2 mx200 + msi k7266pro2 scores 2400 in 3d2001 and gives 30+ fps on ground level even with clutter on..

Needless to say my next purchase will be a leadtek GF3 ti200 (leadtek because they use high quality filters enabling crisp 2D image quality unlike other geforce's.)

[ 11-09-2001: Message edited by: Mr RiplEy ]

mason22 · « **Reply #2 on:** November 09, 2001, 01:22:00 AM »

Pand, that's a great system...ripley is right though. The video card is the hold up. the MX line is meant more for the budget and lower end CPU's. What's happening is that your MX 200 card is maxed out. That 1.53ghz CPU can push a lot of data, grab a Geforce 3 Ti 500 if you can affoard it, or maybe a Geforce2ULTRA 64meg if you want to spend a little less. Those cards will make a huge difference in your FPS.

Also, get the latest VIA drivers for your motherboard. And, whatever video card you do pick up, make sure you have good drivers for it as well. Lephturn can tell you all about that.

your machine is almost identical to what i am looking at purchasing (with the exception of the video card). nothing wrong there

If you do get a G2 ULTRA or G3, you should easily see FPS at 1600x1200 32bit above 30!

I have a PIII600 overclocked to 900mhz and a Geforce2 ULTRA 64meg, my FPS avg about 15 in hvy smoke, to 40/50's at the fastest. and that's playng at 1600x1200 32bit. So expect anything faster than that with a better card. Hell, even a Radeon 64meg would be sweet.
www.pricewatch.com check through the different online stores there for the lowest prices.

hope this helps.

Fishu · « **Reply #3 on:** November 09, 2001, 02:14:00 AM »

Theres something else wrong..

I'd get that much 3d marks with TNT2 and cel 500.
Geforce MX really shouldn't be causing THAT low 3d marks.
However, not the best one for high mhz computers.

It can be also software based or very well in VIA drivers.
I had once registry messed up in this win98 for some reason, 3dmark only gave over 1200 points instead of normal ~2500 - backup registry restored it.

for that combo I'd say ~2000 is absolute minimum.

I'd recommend checking VIA drivers first (in case mobo has one), checking BIOS and checking windows drivers etc. (try different detonator drivers)
Before doing anything radical, it might be best to try reinstall W2K.. if you really bother to and think you're out of options.

[ 11-09-2001: Message edited by: Fishu ]

Pand · « **Reply #4 on:** November 09, 2001, 02:18:00 AM »

Check this out guys! You might find it amusing.

I took my old video card out of my old 800mhz machine... it is an ASUS Geforce2 MX 32MB Card. I replaced the POS and I REALLY MEAN POS eVGA Geforce2 MX 64MB Card and it doubled my framerate.

I find it rediculous that a company can make video cards and call it a great card. What BS. That's definitly something I forgot to research. I just assumed

my NEW 64MB card would run faster than my old 32MB card of the same genre. Oh well, another day, another lesson learned!

Thank you all for your help and your input. You have no idea how pissed off I was. I didn't think it was only a video card problem! Whew

Regards,

Justin

mrsid2 · « **Reply #5 on:** November 09, 2001, 03:45:00 AM »

But seriously, consider upgrading your vidcard. Now it's like putting a carburetor from YUGO 1.0 to a 8.2 liter cadillac V8..

Sure it runs but hmm.. need more juice?

Dead Man Flying · « **Reply #6 on:** November 09, 2001, 03:51:00 AM »

It's definitely your video card, Pand. At this point, the bottleneck on anything above about 1Ghz is the video card. I currently have a 1Ghz Athlon TBird with a venerable GeForce 2 32MB card and achieve a reasonable framerate (20 to 50fps) in 1024x768 @ 32 bit color.

A friend of mine has a system exactly identical to mine except he just upgraded to a GeForce 3 Ti500 64MB card... he's getting 80+ fps in 1600x1200 @ 32 bit color. It's therefore clear to me that right now the videocard is the biggest issue.

-- Todd/Leviathn

weazel · « **Reply #7 on:** November 09, 2001, 08:11:00 AM »

Make sure you install the 1.07 SiS AGP driver set.

1GHZ AMD Thunderbird
ECS K7S5A
256MB PC2100 DDR
Gainward GF2-MX400 64mb
Detonator XP 21.85
98Lite Pro

2956 3DMarks

Pand · « **Reply #8 on:** November 09, 2001, 08:30:00 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by weazel:
[QB]Make sure you install the 1.07 SiS AGP driver set.

Where can I find the 1.07 Sis AGP Driver set?

Regards, and Thanks in advance!

Justin

weazel · « **Reply #9 on:** November 09, 2001, 09:47:00 AM »

AGP1.07.exe

Raubvogel · « **Reply #10 on:** November 09, 2001, 01:35:00 PM »

If you can afford it Newegg has Gainward GF3's for $239. These are the original GF3's, not the Ti series...but I got one and clocked it faster than a Ti500. Its clocked at 250 core/520 memory and runs smooth and stable. With a Athlon 1.4ghz I get 60FPS at 1600x1200 32 bit res. 3DMark2001 score of 6700. Well worth the investment. The problem with the MX chips is they use low bandwidth memory and the 200s only have 2 rendering pipelines so there really isn't even any room to overclock them. Don't be fooled by the 64mb tag...the Elsa with 32mb probably has better memory bandwidth and that is the biggest factor in performance of GF chipsets.

weazel · « **Reply #11 on:** November 09, 2001, 02:00:00 PM »

The problem with the MX chips is they use low bandwidth memory and the 200s only have 2 rendering pipelines so there really isn't even any room to overclock them. Don't be fooled by the 64mb tag...

Yeah, I didn't have the cash for a GF2 Ultra or GF3 so I got the Gainward "Golden Sample", it has high quality 5.5ns SDRAM (PowerStrip says it has SRAM DDR) and is almost as fast as the GF2 GTS cards.

I added a 486 cooling fan and hacked the cards BIOS to O/C it at 200 Core/333 Memory, it will run 225 core with no problem but doesn't add anymore FPS.

Kieran · « **Reply #12 on:** November 09, 2001, 02:11:00 PM »

I just built:

AMD XP1500
A7VTA3 MB 266FSB
256MB DDR
7200 WD
Geforce 2 GTS 32MB DDR
Win98

and I have rock-solid 60+fps in all but the smokiest environs, and even then only drop to 30's and 40's. You can bet I will slap a bit more RAM and a Ti-500 when the price comes down a bit.

P.S. My 3Dmark2001 score is in the 3300's. It could be better, but I am a bit saddled by a budget MB and relatively old video card.

[ 11-09-2001: Message edited by: Kieran ]

Gunthr · « **Reply #13 on:** November 09, 2001, 02:52:00 PM »

Quote

Get a program called nvreffix from fileplanet - that enables you to get normal refresh rates in games with W2k. Otherwise your game refresh will be stuck in 60hz - ouch! That's due to a bug in all nvidia w2k drivers.

- Mr Ripley

Funny thing. I tried this little program, even though my refresh rates in games seemed fine. (If its new, or reported to be cool, I gotta try it, even if I don't know what it does

) After installingnvreffixI picked up an average of 10-12 FPS in Aces High climbing out in clear blue sky. I decided to run 3dMark2001, to see how this affected my original score of 3495 3d marks that I ran before nvreffix. My 3dMark went down to 3220! This doesn't square with my frame rate increase in AH.

I'm trying to remember if I changed bios settings since my original run of 3dMark2001. That is the only explanation I can think of for this behavior - I might have forgotten to write down a change in bios setting, which adversly effected the benchmark without noticibly effecting the FR . Hmm.

AMD XP 1600 CPU
Shuttle AK31 (266a Chipset)
512 mb Crucial DDR 2100
Ledtek GeForce2 GTS/PRO 32mb
Nvidia Reference Driver 7.58
Win2k
WD 7200rpm Hard Drive ATA 100

.

[ 11-09-2001: Message edited by: Gunthr ]

Kieran · « **Reply #14 on:** November 09, 2001, 03:25:00 PM »

Gunthr-

Take the 3DMark2001 score for what it is worth- it is a benchmark, but little more. It gives you an approximate idea of how your system rates generally against other rigs, but you will still see some apps your rig does better than those with higher scores. The bottom line is and should be how does your rig perform in your app of choice, and did you see an improvement with a patch?

My questions to add to this mess are:

1. Should I move from Win98 to Win2K, and;

2. Edited out my stupid second question. I should read more carefully...

[ 11-09-2001: Message edited by: Kieran ]