From the original thread:
******
I think my response to all of this is, congratulations! AGP texture
acceleration is the most important thing, because many games check for
it, and won't load if it is missing. (For example, now you should
be able to run 3DMark2001SE if you want.)
I downloaded 3Dmark 2001 today. Its a pretty good program. I tried it at
640X480 -the result was 8516, then 800X600 and it was 6021, then 1024X768
and it was 7241. Is that no good? The games played fine. I play mainly
adventure games like Syberia, Gabriel Knight, etc., so wouldn't be as
demanding as those games in 3dMark, but I understand the games in 2Dmark are
needed for the tests. In 3Dmark my card is identified as 2X AGP..
Yesterday, I went to the computer store, showed the guy printout tests
showing the card only
running at 2X and he said he would exchange the card for the same one as he
thought it was the video card. I installed it, but its exactly the same as
the other one -2X only. I said to the guy, what if its the motherboard. He
said "I don't think it would be that. We never have problems with Asus
boards ". He said maybe the card only runs at 2X but I said it should work
at 4X, then he mentions about the BIOS has to be set to this and that. I say
yes, I know about that. I've done all my own upgrading including
motherboards for the last 10 years, and he's probably used to a lot of
people who know nothing about computers. I've never had a Radeon card
though. The board and video card have a warranty with the store for one
year, but the guy said they don't test hardware in the store. they send it
to their warehouse and they do testing there. so who knows how long they
take. They only do repairs in the store if you pay. They are all very nice
when you are buying stuff, and yes the hardware has one year warranty, but
its a different story if you need free service.
The guy also said I notice you use Win 98. Your problem might be helped by
installing Win XP. First of all, I don't believe that, and secondly I don't
have the money for Win XP and I don't want Win XP. I like win 98SE just fine
and can play older windows and DOS games I want to replay now and then. So
either I have to take out the motherboard and take it to them to test, and
have no computer again, or just leave things as they are and forget it. I
don't know if its worth it to pursue it any further, but on the other hand,
if its the board and I want to update my video card later, a new video card
may only work at 2X.
I downloaded that CPU-Z program tonight that someone mentioned in this NG
(thanks to them) and there is a tab for the motherboard and it identifies
the AGP transfer rate as 2X. Doesn't that mean for sure, the motherboard
will only do 2X, no matter which card I would put in? or does it not mean
that necessarily?
The speed of AGP transfer
is a secondary issue - you'll still get some use out of the card, as
there is diminishing return with higher AGP transfer rate. In fact,
in some cases, AGP 4X on an AGP 2.0 compliant card (i.e. uses all
protocols available to AGP 2.0) can be faster than an AGP 8X
card on an AGP 3.0 compliant card. This is because AGP 3.0 removed
some features that presumably wouldn't have scaled well to 8X
rates. So, raw speed isn't everything.
But in your example above though, you are talking about differences between
a 4X card and an 8X card, not a 2X like I have which is even slower than 4X.
Do you think there is much difference between a 2X and a 4X card?
So are you saying that AGP transfer acceleration is more important
(especially when playing games) than whether a card is 2X or 4X. Would a
video card with 2X and 128MB be faster than a 4X with 64 MB?
If SmartGART offers you the 4X rate, but sets it back to 2X when
the Windows desktop reappears after a reboot, that means there
must have been trouble detected when SmartGART did its testing
after the reboot. At least this eliminates the BIOS as the
sole agent of the problem, as I've noticed that SmartGART doesn't
pay attention to the BIOS setting anyway.
How does it eliminate the BIOS as a sole agent of the problem? you mean
because Smart gart ignoes the BIOS as you have mentioned? It looks like
Smartgart controls the safe speed of the video card regardless of what the
BIOS is set at. When I first downloaded Catalyst drivers, Smartgart slider
only went up to 2X, but when I installed different Catalyst drivers, the
slider went up to 4X and I thought great! the card can be set at 4X, but
that didn't work out because Smart puts the slider back to 2X. You can see
the screen blinking at bootup where the AGP rate is being changed by
Smartgart.
SmartGART must be
examining the same info that Powerstrip gave you, and picks the
lower of the motherboard/video card status register limits to
figure out what to offer in the control panel.
Thats what it looks like. Powerstrip gives you good information.
(What I cannot tell
you, is if the ATI Catalyst drivers have any hard-coded motherboard
or video card info - like special case code for certain combinations
of hardware. This should only be necessary for cases where the
driver test at boot time would crash the machine, as if the bus
recovery mechanism works properly, the test should be able to
be carried out for any combination of hardware.)
I don't know that either.
Perhaps the new BIOS did something to change the device ID of the
AGP interface, and then the next time you used the Via 4in1
installer, a different AGP driver got installed ? Maybe you used
an older 4in1 driver, which had a different AGP driver in it ?
I think the significant difference is the "VIA CPU to AGP" thing.
Somehow you got a different driver, and it is working better.
It might be working better. I don't really know, but it has not change the
AGP 2X problem.
At this point, if you benchmark it and are happy with the results,
you could keep your system as is. If not, then you could swap
some hardware, on the off chance that things could get better.
What hardware could I swap? I already swapped the video card. I would have
to take the motherboard in and leave it with them for testing. How do I know
they will give me the correct diagnosis? This is the first time dealing with
this store, though they have 3 other stores in Toronto.
I am wondering if I will be any better off in the end. Its a lot of
inconvenience and I've spent hours
and days on this thing already.
I'd suggest contacting tech support at ATI and/or Asus, to find out
if the lack of 4X is a known problem, but the odds of getting
an answer are pretty limited.
I could ask both of them but I would think that if the 9000 pro and Asus
A7V8X-X motherboard combination made the card run at 2X that it would have
been widely known long ago. The Radeon 9000 Pro is an oldish card now.
Now that the Via end of things is "fixed", maybe running through
the series of ATI Catalyst driver versions again might help.
Only if you have the stomach for more reboots
Well, the AGP texture acceleration is working now. And my computer seems
stable enough so the Catalyst drivers are pk, but I doubt that changing the
Catalyst drivers are going to allow the video card to go at 2X. Or is it
possible different Catalyst drivers could change the card to 4X?
From what I have told you in this message, in your opinion, do you think the
motherboard is the problem, or do you think that the motherboard could be
ok, but does not like the Radeon 9000 pro and won't let it run any faster
than 2X.?
Mary
