Problems with Radeon 9800 Saphire Atlantis

  • Thread starter Thread starter Peter James
  • Start date Start date
P

Peter James

I changed my graphics card from a nVidia GF4 MX440 with 64 meg to a
Radeon 9800 Saphire Atlantis with 128 meg. The result is that my
picture and graphics are worse now that they were with the nVidia
card. My system is:-
My system is:
Windows XP and SP2
Pentium 4 2.8 Ghz
Radeon 9800 Saphire Atlantis with 128 meg
DVD R+W drive
Realtek Ethernet Card
768 meg ram
Maxtor HD 55.9 gig

Am I expecting too much of this card? I downloaded the latests
drivers, and used the aTI set-up Wizard to configure the card. Can
anyone advise me on this. Thanks.
-
Peter James
Remove AT to reply

P F James
 
Peter said:
I changed my graphics card from a nVidia GF4 MX440 with 64 meg to a
Radeon 9800 Saphire Atlantis with 128 meg. The result is that my
picture and graphics are worse now that they were with the nVidia
card.
Click to expand...

Hi,

what do you mean by "worse"? Here 9800 Saphire Ultimate as replacement
for matrox card. Looks great,
Niclaas
 
Peter James said:
I changed my graphics card from a nVidia GF4 MX440 with 64 meg to a
Radeon 9800 Saphire Atlantis with 128 meg. The result is that my
picture and graphics are worse now that they were with the nVidia
card. My system is:-
My system is:
Windows XP and SP2
Pentium 4 2.8 Ghz
Radeon 9800 Saphire Atlantis with 128 meg
DVD R+W drive
Realtek Ethernet Card
768 meg ram
Maxtor HD 55.9 gig
Click to expand...

This should not be happening. A 128bit 9800 Atlantis card will yield
performance in the 9600XT range. WAY above what your old Nvidia card does.
Probable cause: Traces and remains of the old Nvidia drivers and DLL's
causing problems and slowdown. Use a driver cleaning utility, registry
cleaner or manually delete all old Nvidia video files and registry entries.
Then reinstall the latest Catalysts. I had the same problem when a couple of
years ago when I went from a Geforce2 GTS to a Radeon 8500. Cleaning up the
registry and old drivers did the trick. 3DMark01 went up over 50%.
 
This should not be happening. A 128bit 9800 Atlantis card will yield
performance in the 9600XT range. WAY above what your old Nvidia card does.
Probable cause: Traces and remains of the old Nvidia drivers and DLL's
causing problems and slowdown. Use a driver cleaning utility, registry
cleaner or manually delete all old Nvidia video files and registry entries.
Then reinstall the latest Catalysts. I had the same problem when a couple of
years ago when I went from a Geforce2 GTS to a Radeon 8500. Cleaning up the
registry and old drivers did the trick. 3DMark01 went up over 50%.
Click to expand...
Did all of that, also removed the ATI drivers and HL2. Defragged the
HD and then re-installed ATI drivers and HL2. the result is the same.
Very slow to load and with very bad graphics. Lots of triangular
shaped shadow type shapes floating across the screen, with a very poor
picture quality with a "shaking" unstable type graphics.
I down-loaded AquaMark3 and ran the test with the following results:
General:
Name: Benchmark 2004-11-26 15-34-23
Processor:
Vendor: GenuineIntel
Name: Pentium(R) 4 processor
SpeedMHz: 2789
Type: 0
Family: 15
Model: 2
Stepping: 7
Flags: 0xBFEBFBFF
Number: 1
HyperThreading: n/a
MemoryOS: 536330240
Graphics:
Description: RADEON 9800 PRO
Vendor: 4098
Device: 20040
SubSys: 74454859
Revision: 0
CoreClock: 324
MemoryClock: 290
Driver: ati2dvag.dll
DriverVersion: 6.14.10.6490
VideoMemory: 131072000
TextureMemory: 246415360
OperatingSystem:
Version: Microsoft Windows XP
Type:
Build: Service Pack 2 2600
Run0:
DisplayWidth: 1024
DisplayHeight: 768
DisplayDepth: 32
AntialiasingMode: 0
AntialiasingQuality: 0
AnisotropicFiltering: 4
DetailLevel: 4
AvgFPS: 30.052057
MinFPS: 7.525845
MaxFPS: 76.000000
AvgFPSRender: 44.092403
AvgFPSSimulation: 94.335754
AvgTrianglesPerSecond: 9046636
MinTrianglesPerSecond: 1172422
MaxTrianglesPerSecond: 26956954
AquamarkScoreRender: 4410
AquamarkScoreSimulation: 4716
AquamarkScore: 30052
These figures mean nothing to me, but I'm posting them here in the
hope someone can tell me where I go from here. I do notice that
Windows reports my memory as 768 meg but AquaMark3 reports the memory
as 536 meg. Odd?
Thanks in advance.
-
Peter James
Remove AT to reply

P F James
 
Back
Top