My 3D Bench Score VERY Depressing; HELP!!!
Jim S
My computer is a 486DX2/66 with 8 megs RAM and
a Tseng ET4000 1 MB video card. My score was 43.4
Is this as awful as I think it is? No wonder MW2
is so jumpy. Is there anything I can do to improve
this? What would be the least expensive way to improve
my machines' performance?
Thanks. E-mail welcome.
Jim S.
StupidBear
Anthony Davis
In article <40jcp2$p...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, <stupi...@aol.com> writes:
> Path:
gryphon.phoenix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb
com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
> From: stupi...@aol.com (StupidBear)
> Newsgroups:
comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.mechwarrior2,alt.games.mechwarrior2,comp.sys.i
bm.pc.games.strategic
> Subject: Re: My 3D Bench Score VERY Depressing; HELP!!!
> Date: 12 Aug 1995 19:16:50 -0400
> Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
> Lines: 1
> Sender: ro...@newsbf02.news.aol.com
> Message-ID: <40jcp2$p...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
> References: <40j4hv$7...@news1.inlink.com>
> Reply-To: stupi...@aol.com (StupidBear)
> NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
> Xref: gryphon.phoenix.net comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action:108532
alt.mechwarrior2:135 alt.games.mechwarrior2:633
comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic:97015
>
> What else do expect do get on your DX2-66??
>
TonyD
Jim S
>What else do expect do get on your DX2-66??
Don't know - why do you think I asked? Did you read my post?
I wanted to know how this score is.
Thanks for you concern and help.
Jim S
>stupi...@aol.com (StupidBear) wrote:
>>What else do expect do get on your DX2-66??
>
RDClark
If this is an ISA bus video board, this score is very good. Very, very
good. So good that you probably can do nothing to improve it, except
upgrade to a local bus motherboard with a fast lb video board and a faster
CPU.
If it's a VLB video board, it's still not out of line. Point your Web
browser at http://www.dfw.net/~sdw/index.html and you'll find a list of
other machines' 3DBench scores to compare yours with. You'll see that the
fastest video boards will get you up to 50 or so on 3DBench, but better
performance than that will require a faster CPU.
------------------------------------------------------------
|---RichC----------------------------Interfacing is easy---|
|---rd...@aol.com-------Compatibility takes a lifetime---|
------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Weburg
>
>Just downloaded the 3dBench program and ran it.
>My computer is a 486DX2/66 with 8 megs RAM and
>a Tseng ET4000 1 MB video card. My score was 43.4
>
>Is this as awful as I think it is? No wonder MW2
>is so jumpy. Is there anything I can do to improve
>this? What would be the least expensive way to improve
>my machines' performance?
Funny, I get the exact same score-- 43.4. Same system specs as yours,
too. As many have said, you can't really expect much more from a
DX2/66. If you want bigger and better, get yourself a Pentium. As far
as improving your system goes, I really doubt there's any cost-worthy
upgrades for you. Besides, 3D Bench isn't very trusted for benchmarks.
--
_____________________________________________________________________
wmwe...@ix.netcom.com
Farlander
>Just downloaded the 3dBench program and ran it.
>My computer is a 486DX2/66 with 8 megs RAM and
>a Tseng ET4000 1 MB video card. My score was 43.4
>Is this as awful as I think it is? No wonder MW2
>is so jumpy. Is there anything I can do to improve
>this? What would be the least expensive way to improve
>my machines' performance?
>Thanks. E-mail welcome.
>Jim S.
Thats not bad at all. I only got about 46 with my old DX2/66. That was
with a 2MB Tseng card. 43 is about an average score for your system.
Farlander
(When the worlds have crumbled, and the masses look for a savior, Bruce
will be there for us, chainsaw outstretched in friendship. And we will
take his hand(?), and it will be good...) -The Book of Bruce 9:13
MPMP
on the 3d bench. i'm running a dx2-66 with a vl bus card with 2megs on
board. i only have one vl bus slot and i opted to get a vl video card
rather than a vl controller card with some memory onboard. the way things
are going, we're going to have to get pentiums. i'm not a happy camper.
J. Douglas Smith
Somebody else that makes me depressed as hell! <g>
I've got a p90 w/16mb ram and a trident 9440 chipset 2mb Dram video card.
My 3dbench is 43.4!!!
AAARRRGGGHHHh!!!
However I have been doing research into getting a new card!
The concensus of the sources mostly advice from programmers is one of 2
choices
1. If you absolutely can't wait 6 months, get either a Matrox Millenium
or Diamond Stealth64 2mb min Vram card.
2. If you can wait. There will be a literal explosion of new 3d
accelerator cards hitting the market soon(I hope sooner).
These cards should include at least current 2d acceleration
technology. If the companies making them are smart anyway and nobody
ever said that. <g>! ;-}
Check out the url in a posting by me on this newsgroup relating to
Lockheed Real3d chips.
I've recently been given advice that Lockheed has not at this time
actually produced any silicon for the 3d acc. pc market. As their media
hype seems to imply, but my sources are not confirmed on this. I'm still
in initial contact with someone who may no more about the matter.
Email welcome!
Doug
student UMASS
Dana Allen
Hey, where can you download it at?
I would like to use it to test out various machines before I buy.
Does anyone have a recommended benchmark for MW2?
I think MW2 is the straw that is going to cause me to buy a new system.
Peter Collins
>From: wmwe...@ix.netcom.com (Michael Weburg )
>Subject: Re: My 3D Bench Score VERY Depressing; HELP!!!
>In <40j4hv$7...@news1.inlink.com> Jim S <ji...@inlink.com> writes:
>>
>>Just downloaded the 3dBench program and ran it.
>>My computer is a 486DX2/66 with 8 megs RAM and
>>a Tseng ET4000 1 MB video card. My score was 43.4
>>
>>Is this as awful as I think it is? No wonder MW2
>>is so jumpy. Is there anything I can do to improve
>>this? What would be the least expensive way to improve
>>my machines' performance?
>
>Funny, I get the exact same score-- 43.4. Same system specs as yours,
>too. As many have said, you can't really expect much more from a
>DX2/66. If you want bigger and better, get yourself a Pentium. As far
>as improving your system goes, I really doubt there's any cost-worthy
>upgrades for you. Besides, 3D Bench isn't very trusted for benchmarks.
I trust 3dbench scores more than any other for a machines game playing
ability.
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Peter Collins email: coll...@kai.ee.cit.ac.nz |
| call my raytracing home page at: http://www.ee.cit.ac.nz/~collinpe |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
SkiBum [CSD]
: >Funny, I get the exact same score-- 43.4. Same system specs as yours,
: >too. As many have said, you can't really expect much more from a
: >DX2/66. If you want bigger and better, get yourself a Pentium. As far
: >as improving your system goes, I really doubt there's any cost-worthy
: >upgrades for you. Besides, 3D Bench isn't very trusted for benchmarks.
: I trust 3dbench scores more than any other for a machines game playing
: ability.
I got 43.4 with an ET4000 also, but I just switched to a Mach 64
PCI with 2 megs of VRam, and am getting 53.4 now... I want to what I get
once my DX4-100 comes in tomorrow...
--
Brad Borgald, CRT | p7...@unb.ca
Network Technician | ski...@sauron.csd.unb.ca
Computing Services | bbor...@hhnov1.unb.ca
University of New Brunswick | Solomon, The North Face, No Fear!
Fredericton, NB, Canada | Nothing but C for me, BSc.EE
____ _ _ ____
/ ___|| | _(_) __ ) _ _ _ __ ___
Just a \___ \| |/ / | _ \| | | | '_ ` _ \ stuck in
___) | <| | |_) | |_| | | | | | | the east!
|____/|_|\_\_|____/ \__,_|_| |_| |_|
gior...@ix.netcom.com
>Just downloaded the 3dBench program and ran it.
>My computer is a 486DX2/66 with 8 megs RAM and
>a Tseng ET4000 1 MB video card. My score was 43.4
>Is this as awful as I think it is? No wonder MW2
>is so jumpy. Is there anything I can do to improve
>this? What would be the least expensive way to improve
>my machines' performance?
43.4 is a good score. I got a rating of 66fps. My computer is a
Pentium 90MHz with 16MB RAM and a decent (but not the fastest, at
least in DOS) 2MB PCI video board.
Bobby D Hournbuckle
>PCI with 2 megs of VRam, and am getting 53.4 now... I want to what I get
>once my DX4-100 comes in tomorrow...
>
>--
>Brad Borgald, CRT | p7...@unb.ca
My stealth32 (VL, 2MB dram) gives 71.8 fps on a Dell DX4-100 (16MB ram)...
How's that compare????
Just asking...
Bob H.
Bobby D Hournbuckle
>
>Hey, where can you download it at?
>I would like to use it to test out various machines before I buy.
>Does anyone have a recommended benchmark for MW2?
>
>I think MW2 is the straw that is going to cause me to buy a new system.
>
I've seen it run pretty smooth in 640x480 with a bench of 88 fps...
Try http://www.dfw.net/~sdw/bench.html for benchmarking....
Bob H.
Cold Fusion
dp...@falun.cs.ualberta.ca (Denis R. Papp) wrote:
:"J. Douglas Smith" <jds...@titan.oit.umass.edu> writes:
:
:>Somebody else that makes me depressed as hell! <g>
:
:>I've got a p90 w/16mb ram and a trident 9440 chipset 2mb Dram video card.
:
:>My 3dbench is 43.4!!!
Hmmm that is wierd...I have a vesa local bus card just like yours, Trident
9440 w/2meg and my CPU is an AMD 486/120....my 3d bench is like 76.1,
yours sounds really messed up.
CF
---
"I am become Death, the Destroyer of Worlds." --- Robert Oppenheimer
Hou Lim
>From: coll...@kai.ee.cit.ac.nz (Peter Collins)
>Subject: Re: My 3D Bench Score VERY Depressing; HELP!!!
>In article <40jq47$6...@ixnews7.ix.netcom.com> wmwe...@ix.netcom.com (Michael Weburg ) writes:
>>From: wmwe...@ix.netcom.com (Michael Weburg )
>>Subject: Re: My 3D Bench Score VERY Depressing; HELP!!!
>>Date: 13 Aug 1995 03:04:39 GMT
>>In <40j4hv$7...@news1.inlink.com> Jim S <ji...@inlink.com> writes:
>>>
>>>Just downloaded the 3dBench program and ran it.
>>>My computer is a 486DX2/66 with 8 megs RAM and
>>>a Tseng ET4000 1 MB video card. My score was 43.4
>>>
>>>Is this as awful as I think it is? No wonder MW2
>>>is so jumpy. Is there anything I can do to improve
>>>this? What would be the least expensive way to improve
>>>my machines' performance?
>>
>>Funny, I get the exact same score-- 43.4. Same system specs as yours,
>>too. As many have said, you can't really expect much more from a
>>DX2/66. If you want bigger and better, get yourself a Pentium. As far
>>as improving your system goes, I really doubt there's any cost-worthy
>>upgrades for you. Besides, 3D Bench isn't very trusted for benchmarks.
>I trust 3dbench scores more than any other for a machines game playing
>ability.
>+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
>| Peter Collins email: coll...@kai.ee.cit.ac.nz |
>| call my raytracing home page at: http://www.ee.cit.ac.nz/~collinpe |
>+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
I've got a DX2-66 with 8megs and a Cloud9 card. It manages about 49fps.
Tseng Lab cards are pretty all-rounder performer. If you have a trident, you
are in for a 'sloww..' performance even on a Pentium-120. Its just that the
card is slow ie not for demanding games!
Slang
: Hey, where can you download it at?
: I would like to use it to test out various machines before I buy.
: Does anyone have a recommended benchmark for MW2?
: I think MW2 is the straw that is going to cause me to buy a new system.
I hope you are aware that in order for 3dbench,PCBench etc scores to be
valid you must run them under a minimal configuration.Go to the following
url and you can find access to dload 3dbench and other benchmark programs.
http://www.dfw.net/~sdw/index.html
Make sure to make a boot disk with the minimal congig. given at the site.
3dbench was giving my P90 83.3 and I thought with the triton chipset and
Hercules Stingray 64/2mb I should be getting around 90. After running it
under a minimal configuration sure enough the score was 90.9.The same is
true with PCBench also.So if your going to run tests on PC's before you
buy them make sure to take a boot disk with you to run all the pc's under
the same conditions.
Steve
"Through tattered clothes small vices do appear;
Robes and furred gowns hide all."
William Shakespeare
intruder
>Just downloaded the 3dBench program and ran it.
>My computer is a 486DX2/66 with 8 megs RAM and
>a Tseng ET4000 1 MB video card. My score was 43.4
>Is this as awful as I think it is? No wonder MW2
>is so jumpy. Is there anything I can do to improve
>this? What would be the least expensive way to improve
>my machines' performance?
I get 50.0 on my AMD DX/2 66. Have Genoa 1mb VLB video and 256k of
15ns cache. You're not too far off - a little tweaking in CMOS and
possibly a few motherboard wait state jumpers and you should be there.
*chuckle*
Intruder |
|
_____ (@) _____
O ------------==/ . \==------------ O
0^0 (__) \_____/ (__) 0^0
|___|
Intr...@iti2.net
Jon Nisbet
: How's that compare????
: Just asking...
: Bob H.
That's pretty good. Feel lucky. My P90 with Mach64 gives me 77 fps.
--
Jeffrey Lam
>
>Just downloaded the 3dBench program and ran it.
>My computer is a 486DX2/66 with 8 megs RAM and
>a Tseng ET4000 1 MB video card. My score was 43.4
>
Can you tell me where to download the 3dBench?
Thank you.
Jeffrey Lam
Kong Kritayakirana
>a Hercules Stingray 64 PCI
i compared this stingray 64 with #9 motion 771 (s3-968) and stingray
(ark2000) is almost as fast in windows, too. price/performance-wise, the
ark2000pv with EDO DRAM blows away s3-968 cards like stealth64v or
9fx771. in DOS, nothing can touch it. 3dbench reports 125.0 on my P120
(i know it isn't a great test, but it gives quite good _relative_ speed
in DOS vga modes)
Anssi Saari
>Do you use windows a lot? If you want DOS games speed get
>a Hercules Stingray 64 PCI
i compared this stingray 64 with #9 motion 771 (s3-968) and stingray
(ark2000) is almost as fast in windows, too.
What's "almost as fast" and in what modes? The benefit of VRAM is only evident
in memory intensive modes like 1024x768x16bit.
Anssi
Kong Kritayakirana
> >a Hercules Stingray 64 PCI
>
> i compared this stingray 64 with #9 motion 771 (s3-968) and stingray
> (ark2000) is almost as fast in windows, too.
>
>What's "almost as fast" and in what modes? The benefit of VRAM is only evident
>in memory intensive modes like 1024x768x16bit.
that's exactly the mode i tested it with. stingray 64/video is only
about 10% slower. remember stingray 64/video has 45nS EDO ram and S3-968
uses 70nS VRAM.
Mike Herauf
>>My 3dbench is 43.4!!!
That bites. My 486/66 8Mb 1Mb DRAM VLB has a 3D bench of 43.6! This is the
3D bench that is dated 1992. It's the only copy I could find anywhere.
My P120 DS 64 2MB VRAM w/16 MB EDO is off the scale. It reads 00.0! Running
from windows, however, results in a rating of 90.9.
Is there a more recent version of 3D bench? If so, anybody know where I can
find it on the net?
Mike
Tim Brennan
I am also concerned that my system is not optimized. I have a P100
and Diamond Stealth 64 PCI with 2MB of VRAM and only get a 3dbench score
of 58.8. I've tried installing the univbe51a but my 3dbench score does not
change and it even locks up the computer on exit sometimes. Graphics in mw2
in some areas are also messed up with the VESA driver installed. Anyone with
any advice?
T.I.A.,
Tim
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"... I don't understand quantum physics, I just teach it." - Prof. Giri(dec.)
Penn State Univ.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Herauf
>> accelerator cards hitting the market soon(I hope sooner).
>> These cards should include at least current 2d acceleration
>> technology. If the companies making them are smart anyway and nobody
>> ever said that. <g>! ;-}
>
>they will only really accelerate things that specifically use them - hence
>will be initially quite useless
A literal explosion? I think not. Business would most certainly suffer if
computer hardware outlets suddenly started to eplode.
I do, however, know that current 3D acceleration hardware is driver
specific, and you need to use a specific graphics engine to take advantage
of them. Don't get one and assume Mech2 or Navy Fighters will suddenly run
like a SPARC workstation.
You may not notice any difference at all, unless they support the card in
question.
Mike
feat...@netcom.com
: That bites. My 486/66 8Mb 1Mb DRAM VLB has a 3D bench of 43.6! This is the
: My P120 DS 64 2MB VRAM w/16 MB EDO is off the scale. It reads 00.0! Running
: from windows, however, results in a rating of 90.9.
: Is there a more recent version of 3D bench? If so, anybody know where I can
: find it on the net?
: Mike
That's about right (the 00.0). My p133/16MB EDO/DS 64 DRAM gives a rating of
125 (running over the scale)..
Heather
Phil Epstein
Denis R. Papp <dp...@amisk.cs.ualberta.ca> wrote:
>>1. If you absolutely can't wait 6 months, get either a Matrox Millenium
>> or Diamond Stealth64 2mb min Vram card.
>
>Do you use windows a lot? If you want DOS games speed get
>a Hercules Stingray 64 PCI
Why, that would be a waste of money. The Diamond Stealth64 is plenty
fast in DOS...and blows Hercules away in windows...
Phil Epstein
Phil Epstein
Kong Kritayakirana <ko...@psych.Stanford.EDU> wrote:
>>Do you use windows a lot? If you want DOS games speed get
>>a Hercules Stingray 64 PCI
>
>ark2000pv with EDO DRAM blows away s3-968 cards like stealth64v or
>9fx771. in DOS, nothing can touch it. 3dbench reports 125.0 on my P120
>(i know it isn't a great test, but it gives quite good _relative_ speed
>in DOS vga modes)
Ummm you can get 125.0 on a p120 with a Diamond Stealth 64 so how can
"nothing touch it"?????
Phil Epstein
Kal Wallner
>1. If you absolutely can't wait 6 months, get either a Matrox Millenium
> or Diamond Stealth64 2mb min Vram card.
I'd lean towards the Matrox - not only is it faster in both DOS &
Windows then the Stealth64, it's CHEAPER and it's got 3D
accel thrown in to boot.
Just got one myself to go with my ASUS ...4XE motherboard + 256K
Pipeline cache (8ns) + Pentium 133 CPU + 16mb EDO ram.
I get a 3D bench of 125, Norton SI of 420, and Wing C. 3 gives me
0 (zero = fastest!) for both CPU and video performance!
BTW, there's a WWW site with 4-5 lists of various benchmarks, along
with locations for all the benchmark programs. Anyone got the URL
handy? I lost it.....
Bobby D Hournbuckle
>bdh...@cs.rit.edu (Bobby D Hournbuckle) writes:
>
>>My stealth32 (VL, 2MB dram) gives 71.8 fps on a Dell DX4-100 (16MB ram)...
>>How's that compare????
>
>
>486100#9 GXE 64 1MB DRAM 76.9
>
>I'm not sure what '#9' means in the first on the list, however
>--
>Denis Papp dp...@amisk.cs.ualberta.ca
Thanks Denis, I missed this whenever it came out.
BTW, #9 is the maker of the card (Number 9). A pentium @ work with one of
those gets about 85 fps...
Bob H.
Bobby D Hournbuckle
>
>I am also concerned that my system is not optimized. I have a P100
>and Diamond Stealth 64 PCI with 2MB of VRAM and only get a 3dbench score
>of 58.8. I've tried installing the univbe51a but my 3dbench score does not
Well, I have resigned to buy a new motherboard. One with just PCI & ISA.
All I've read and heard is that the PCI/VL combo boards just give poor
performance when it comes to local bus cards....
Anyone out there able to refute this???
Or anyone know of anyway for the bios to bypass the VL support --> which
would *pray* *pray* *pray* speedup PCI accesses???
Bob H.
SkiBum [CSD]
: In article <40mb9m$s...@sol.sun.csd.unb.ca> p7...@jupiter.sun.csd.unb.ca (SkiBum [CSD]) writes:
: >PCI with 2 megs of VRam, and am getting 53.4 now... I want to what I get
: >once my DX4-100 comes in tomorrow...
: >
: >--
: >Brad Borgald, CRT | p7...@unb.ca
: My stealth32 (VL, 2MB dram) gives 71.8 fps on a Dell DX4-100 (16MB ram)...
: How's that compare????
: Just asking...
: Bob H.
Don't know yet, UPS totalled my CPU in the mail... I'll never use
UPS to ship again... And they said they shipped me a new one by air,
never arrived... Better be here tomorrow...
--
Brad Borgald, CRT | p7...@unb.ca
RDClark
>with locations for all the benchmark programs. Anyone got the URL
>handy? I lost it.....
It's http://www.dfw.net/~sdw/index.html
------------------------------------------------------------
|---RichC----------------------------Interfacing is easy---|
|---rd...@aol.com-------Compatibility takes a lifetime---|
------------------------------------------------------------
David Khoury
: >>My 3dbench is 43.4!!!
: That bites. My 486/66 8Mb 1Mb DRAM VLB has a 3D bench of 43.6! This is the
: 3D bench that is dated 1992. It's the only copy I could find anywhere.
So .... my p90 with 16mb ram and ET4000 video card only does 33.3 fps!!
Actually, I can tweak the BIOS to get 40 fps.
( did I mention that my video card was isa ???)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Khoury |
Student | "Where's the KABOOM ??
University of New South Wales | There was supposed to be an
Sydney, Australia. | earth shattering KABOOM!!"
big...@cse.unsw.edu.au | Marvin Martin
http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~bigdave |
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert Sanheim
: Greetings all.....
: Time to upgrade the old PC, and I'm running out of time (don't
: ask..:D )
:
: Anyhow, since games are a big part of shelling out 3G's for a new
: system, I have to ask this: What is the best setup right now for gaming
: in terms of 'reality'....
:
: For example I'll be looking at P133's (too bad the 150's aren't out
: yet)....PCI bus, 16megs ram (I guess).....but what about Video Cards?
: Can someone give me the "De Facto Standard" for whats the "best" right
: now? Will WIN95 screw all this up (like 3DBENCH scores, etc???).
:
: What about those new accellerated 3D boards....the Matrox one....how's
: that one perform? Do they really turn a DX2's framerate into something
: like a P100 (or...whatever)???
:
: Brant
: If anyone has any suggestions for me, PLEASE e-mail me........Is the
: Diamond Stealth 64 with 2 megs Vram better than, say the Dram version?
: Is it of any significance? Is 133 the fastest I can go chip-wise now?
: What about the next three months?
:
: Help!
Okay, 2 possibilites here (for vid cards), one proven, one unproven. Get
the Diamond Stealth 64 VRAM with 4 megs of it if ya can afford it. Its a
VERY fast card in dos and windows. Get the DRAM if you care more about
dos, since it does a little bit worse in windows (mainly in 24 bit color
modes.)
Or, get the MGA Millenium, this card was rated as FASTER than the Stealth
64 in both dos and windows by CGW. It looks like it might be the new
standard. Don't get any other MGA cards, they all are horrendous in dos
(I know from experience.)
Please excuse any bad typing, its very late and my hands feel like pudding.
Rob
M R
t...@lfs.loral.com "Tim Brennan" writes:
> and Diamond Stealth 64 PCI with 2MB of VRAM and only get a 3dbench score
> of 58.8. I've tried installing the univbe51a but my 3dbench score does not
> change and it even locks up the computer on exit sometimes. Graphics in mw2
> in some areas are also messed up with the VESA driver installed. Anyone with
> any advice?
>
Last time we had this in this group most people came to the conclusion
it was a setting or two in the bios. No idea which ones though - someone
else may remember ?
--
Mark Rogers
+:+:+ Veggie Freedom Fighter: Eat meat - Vegetables have feelings too. +:+:+
+:+:+ Procrastinate now and avoid the rush. +:+:+
+:+:+ Vibro Blades - you gotta love em. +:+:+
Phil Epstein
Denis R. Papp <dp...@amisk.cs.ualberta.ca> wrote:
>486100#9 GXE 64 1MB DRAM 76.9
>I'm not sure what '#9' means in the first on the list, however
#9 is a company who makes graphics card. The card is the #9GXE64.
What's really surprising is that it's at the top of the list, since
generally #9 cards suck in DOS and are more for windows...
>the next 3 all have the ET4000/w32p chip (and two of them
>are Hercules cards) which is also further proof that
>probably the best card you can get for VLB is Hercules Dynamite Power or Pro.
Yeah but I hope you don't use windows in more than 256 colors...
Phil Epstein
Phil Epstein
Denis R. Papp <dp...@amisk.cs.ualberta.ca> wrote:
>ph...@spork.acs.umbc.edu (Phil Epstein) writes:
>
>>In article <40oc2b$h...@scapa.cs.ualberta.ca>,
>>Denis R. Papp <dp...@amisk.cs.ualberta.ca> wrote:
>
>>>>1. If you absolutely can't wait 6 months, get either a Matrox Millenium
>>>> or Diamond Stealth64 2mb min Vram card.
>>>
>>>Do you use windows a lot? If you want DOS games speed get
>>>a Hercules Stingray 64 PCI
>
>>Why, that would be a waste of money. The Diamond Stealth64 is plenty
>>fast in DOS...and blows Hercules away in windows...
>
>Ah - do you have empirical evidence? I doubt it raelly
>blows away the Stingray 64 in windows (though its probably faster)
Ok maybe BLOWS was too strong of a word but it is much faster especially
at high-color palletes. I don't have benchmarks but I've seen systems
with each card and with the Hercules it was much slowed at 15 and 16-bit
colors...
>but if you care more about DOS games then the Hercules Stingray
>is probably faster than the Stealth.
I don't know about that, I'd like to see some 3DBench or PCBench 9.0
benchmarks...
Of course you could say the same thing about Windows benchmarks :) Which
I can't get....
>And what do you mean by waste of money? I wouldnt be surprised if
>the stealth64 was more expensive than Stingray 64
I don't think so, I got my Diamond Stealth 64 w/2MB of DRAM for $159.
Granted that was at a computer show so it's lower than most people will
pay but how much can you get a Stingray 64? I was under the impression
they were $200+...
Phil Epstein
Phil Epstein
Kal Wallner <No email! Use USENET!> wrote:
>"J. Douglas Smith" <jds...@titan.oit.umass.edu> wrote:
>
>>1. If you absolutely can't wait 6 months, get either a Matrox Millenium
>> or Diamond Stealth64 2mb min Vram card.
>
>I'd lean towards the Matrox - not only is it faster in both DOS &
>Windows then the Stealth64, it's CHEAPER and it's got 3D
>accel thrown in to boot.
Huh??? The Maxtrox is not faster in DOS from the marks I've seen. And
isn't it VERY expensive (like $300+?????) The D.Stealth with VRAM can be
gotten for $225....
Phil Epstein
Brant Rusch
Kyle Klukas
ram, and 1 meg dram cheapo VESA card.
Kyle
gior...@ix.netcom.com
>According to the results online for a 486 dx4-100 71.8 is pretty good.
>486100#9 GXE 64 1MB DRAM 76.9
>I'm not sure what '#9' means in the first on the list, however
>the next 3 all have the ET4000/w32p chip (and two of them
>are Hercules cards) which is also further proof that
>probably the best card you can get for VLB is Hercules Dynamite Power or Pro.
>(I experienced a serious 50% noticeable speed upgrade when I got one of those
>instead of my cirrus logic 5428 and the graphics xpression)
"#9" means Number Nine, one of the leading manufacturer of graphics
cards.
John Hendrickson
Bobby D Hournbuckle <bdh...@cs.rit.edu> wrote:
>In article <40qtgg$4...@scapa.cs.ualberta.ca> dp...@amisk.cs.ualberta.ca writes:
>>bdh...@cs.rit.edu (Bobby D Hournbuckle) writes:
>>
>>>How's that compare????
>>
>>
>>486100#9 GXE 64 1MB DRAM 76.9
>>
>>I'm not sure what '#9' means in the first on the list, however
>>Denis Papp dp...@amisk.cs.ualberta.ca
>
>
>Thanks Denis, I missed this whenever it came out.
>
>BTW, #9 is the maker of the card (Number 9). A pentium @ work with one of
>those gets about 85 fps...
>
>Bob H.
>
I have a P-90 with a #9 GXE 64 and I get 110.0. Not bad for an S3 based
card.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Hendrickson Sr. Sysadmin __ __ ____ ___ ___ ____
hen...@primenet.com Princess Cruises /__)/__) / / / / /_ /\ / /_ /
http://www.primenet.com/~hendric / / \ / / / / /__ / \/ /___ /
Rajesh Varia
bdh...@cs.rit.edu "Bobby D Hournbuckle" writes:
> Well, I have resigned to buy a new motherboard. One with just PCI & ISA.
> All I've read and heard is that the PCI/VL combo boards just give poor
> performance when it comes to local bus cards....
>
> Anyone out there able to refute this???
>
> Or anyone know of anyway for the bios to bypass the VL support --> which
> would *pray* *pray* *pray* speedup PCI accesses???
>
> Bob H.
>
I can confirm this from personal experience. I had a 486-66 with a VL-board.
When I upgraded to P-66, I bougnt one of those VIP boards, and the benchmark
ratings for my VL Stealth 64 when down. I tried a PCI version of the same
card in it, and the benchmark when back past the 486 level.
I believe the technical reason (according to the shop that sold it to me)
is that the VL-BUS is hanging of the PCI bus through a buffer chip which
has to cater for the speed-mismatch between PCI & VL. Anyway finally got
some cash together and have just bought a P90 (over clocked to 100) with
Triton-II with burst-mode L2 cache and 16 meg of EDO RAM. I still went
for the Stealth 64 PCI and bloody-hell, does it fly!
Rajesh Varia r...@c4rv.demon.co.uk
Peter Pelka
>
>I am also concerned that my system is not optimized. I have a P100
>of 58.8. I've tried installing the univbe51a but my 3dbench score does not
>change and it even locks up the computer on exit sometimes. Graphics in mw2
>in some areas are also messed up with the VESA driver installed. Anyone with
>any advice?
>
>
>Tim
>
The score is very low indeed, are you sure you're not using one of those PCI/VLB
combo motherboards? These really slow down the system. Also try checking in your
CMOS setup for any wait states and try setting them to 0, also make sure that L1
cache mode is set to write-back and not write-thru. You should be getting a 3D Bench
score around 90 or so.
Pete.
To breath is to Smoke
: For example I'll be looking at P133's (too bad the 150's aren't out
: yet)....PCI bus, 16megs ram (I guess).....but what about Video Cards?
Try to curb your desire if you can till about mid-september. There, Intel
might cut some prices lower again. But then again, someone told me that,
so it's not really "official".
: Can someone give me the "De Facto Standard" for whats the "best" right
: now? Will WIN95 screw all this up (like 3DBENCH scores, etc???).
If you think that you will be using win95, and looking for a card that
can do well in DOS and WIN95, go with Matrox Millenium. ($350 --> 2MB)
If you care about DOS only, don't have that much money to burn, will
settle for great windows (not Excellent), try Hercules Stingray 64.
It comes only on DRAM, 2MB for $190.
BTW, the Stingray is *THE* fastest DOS card in the market right now.
:
: What about those new accellerated 3D boards....the Matrox one....how's
: that one perform? Do they really turn a DX2's framerate into something
: like a P100 (or...whatever)???
No comment on this. If anyone has any info about this, please share it.
:
: Is it of any significance? Is 133 the fastest I can go chip-wise now?
: What about the next three months?
If you have some experience in technical field (or are willing to kinda
experience it), try to buy (from misc.forsale.hardware.*) the triton
chipset MB, with Pipeline Burst (PB) SRAM (I think it sells for $340),
and try to find some EDO ram to go with it.
Right now, 133 is *THE* highest in production (that's why I have it :).
:
: Help!
Hope that helps.
Ciao.
Muljadi Budiman.
Brian Gingold
>That's pretty good. Feel lucky. My P90 with Mach64 gives me 77 fps.
Something wrong with my system? I'm running a P90 with 16MB RAM and an ATI
Mach 64 / 2MB DRAM and I got a score of 66.6 fps. Is it me or does this seem
REALLY low? The card is PCI. Any suggestions/comparisons? Thanks.
Brian Gingold <br...@primenet.com>
Bart McEndree
>Greetings all.....
> Time to upgrade the old PC, and I'm running out of time (don't
>ask..:D )
>
>Anyhow, since games are a big part of shelling out 3G's for a new
>system, I have to ask this: What is the best setup right now for gaming
>in terms of 'reality'....
>
>For example I'll be looking at P133's (too bad the 150's aren't out
>yet)....PCI bus, 16megs ram (I guess).....but what about Video Cards?
>Can someone give me the "De Facto Standard" for whats the "best" right
>now? Will WIN95 screw all this up (like 3DBENCH scores, etc???).
>
>What about those new accellerated 3D boards....the Matrox one....how's
>that one perform? Do they really turn a DX2's framerate into something
>like a P100 (or...whatever)???
>
>Brant
>If anyone has any suggestions for me, PLEASE e-mail me........Is the
>Diamond Stealth 64 with 2 megs Vram better than, say the Dram version?
>Is it of any significance? Is 133 the fastest I can go chip-wise now?
>What about the next three months?
>
>Help!
I have been very happy with my new computer setup. I have a clone P100
with 16 megs, Diamond Stealth 64 DRAM, and a Soundblaster 32AWE. I
decided to pay extra for the ease, speed, and features of a SCSI 1G
hard Drive and 4x CD-ROM. The best improvement I made in my latest
system was a 21 inch monitor. You can't believe a differance a large
monitor makes in 1st person perspective games like Doom, Descent, &
MW2. You don't need a VR helmet if your monitor fills most of your
field of vision 8-) I keep telling everybody I bought this computer to
play the latest games. The true reason I bought it was to impress the
heck out of everybody who sees it. With this monster monitor I can do
that before I even turn my computer on. Good Luck with you quest for a
new computer.
Jeff Harris
>: >>I've got a p90 w/16mb ram and a trident 9440 chipset 2mb Dram video card.
>: >>My 3dbench is 43.4!!!
>: That bites. My 486/66 8Mb 1Mb DRAM VLB has a 3D bench of 43.6! This is the
>: 3D bench that is dated 1992. It's the only copy I could find anywhere.
> So .... my p90 with 16mb ram and ET4000 video card only does 33.3 fps!!
> Actually, I can tweak the BIOS to get 40 fps.
Umm, would anyone say my machine is doing good with a P60, STB
Velocity 2Meg VRAM, 8 Meg getting 62.5 fps?
Or is that low???
Jeff
Old Salt
>Brant Rusch (ru...@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
>: For example I'll be looking at P133's (too bad the 150's aren't out
>: yet)....PCI bus, 16megs ram (I guess).....but what about Video Cards?
>Try to curb your desire if you can till about mid-september. There, Intel
>might cut some prices lower again. But then again, someone told me that,
>so it's not really "official".
In September Intel will stop making the 486 cpu chip. So 486s will (they have
already dropped around 20%) drop in price a lot to clear out for the P-5s and
more imporintly the P-6s. Now I sure the P-5s well also drop in price so that
the P-6s will be what intel will be pushing.
___ ___
______ ______ | | | | ______
=====[______] =====[______] | | | | [______]======
****************old-...@li.net************************************
*"Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose" Sung by *
* But even if I am unskilled in speech, J. Joplin *
* I am not in knowledge....... 2 Co 11:6 *
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
><Canter & Siegel the Bottom feeders of "Green Card" spammers>
Steve Bohne
>
>Umm, would anyone say my machine is doing good with a P60, STB
>Velocity 2Meg VRAM, 8 Meg getting 62.5 fps?
>
>Or is that low???
>
>Jeff
I have a P60 too, also an PCI STB Velocity 2Meg VRAM, and I get 66.6
fps with 3dBench, but only after some BIOS tweakage. So I would say
your score is just about right (maybe a little low, try messing with
your BIOS).
BTW, anyone know what kind of chipset (Neptune?) comes with a P60/66 5
volt board? How do I know if I got it (ie do the actual chips say NEPTUNE)?
--
Steve Bohne
sbo...@wpi.WPI.EDU
Jeff Salzmann
->In article <40psp9$2...@news.rain.org> jni...@rain.org (Jon Nisbet) writes:
->>That's pretty good. Feel lucky. My P90 with Mach64 gives me 77 fps.
->Something wrong with my system? I'm running a P90 with 16MB RAM and an ATI
->Mach 64 / 2MB DRAM and I got a score of 66.6 fps. Is it me or does this seem
->REALLY low? The card is PCI. Any suggestions/comparisons? Thanks.
->Brian Gingold <br...@primenet.com>
Maybe. I got 58.8 using a DX4-100, I figured a P-90 should be a bit more than
just under 8 fps....this mach64 is a real POS, I am really regretting it.
On the other hand, some clown posted something about a program called CTPCI (or
something like that) that speeds up the write to the card, gets about 30%
FASTER....where it is I haven't a clue, idiota didn't say where it was, just
'available at any DOS site'....yeah, not on this planet....
+-----------------------+
| Jeff Salzmann |
| colo...@eznet.net |
| jks...@rit.edu |
+-----------------------+
dani...@smartlink.net
> The best improvement I made in my latest
>system was a 21 inch monitor. You can't believe a differance a large
>monitor makes in 1st person perspective games like Doom, Descent, &
>MW2. You don't need a VR helmet if your monitor fills most of your
>field of vision 8-) I keep telling everybody I bought this computer to
>play the latest games. The true reason I bought it was to impress the
>heck out of everybody who sees it. With this monster monitor I can do
>that before I even turn my computer on. Good Luck with you quest for a
>new computer.
>
I absolutely agree about the monitor. Though 21 inches is a bit big,
a large monitor and SHARP monitor is probably the most important
part of a computer. Just think about it for a second- what are you
trying to get out of the computer? OUTPUT of course! And the better
it looks, the more pleased you will be with the computer. Who cares
if you've got 586-150+ with 128 megs of RAM, and 8 megs of Video and
50 gigs of HDisk space if all you got is a 13 inch monitor that can't show
anything more than 640x480 resolution, and that in .39 dot pitch?!
Now of course, you still need a decent computer behind your big 21 incher,
but those 21 inches will still make up for alot (or just a 17 is fine with me,
so long as its crystal sharp in 1024x768).
>
Kal Wallner
>>I'd lean towards the Matrox - not only is it faster in both DOS &
>>Windows then the Stealth64, it's CHEAPER and it's got 3D
>>accel thrown in to boot.
>Huh??? The Maxtrox is not faster in DOS from the marks I've seen. And
>isn't it VERY expensive (like $300+?????) The D.Stealth with VRAM can be
>gotten for $225....
Don't know how much it goes for in US dollars, but I've seen it for as
low as $390Cdn (so yeah, that's roughly $275US). Oddly enough,
the Steath 64 VRAM's I've seen are all over $400Cdn!
What benchmarks have you seen comparing the two?
J/K Zipursky
>In article <40psp9$2...@news.rain.org> jni...@rain.org (Jon Nisbet) writes:
>>That's pretty good. Feel lucky. My P90 with Mach64 gives me 77 fps.
>Something wrong with my system? I'm running a P90 with 16MB RAM and an ATI
>Mach 64 / 2MB DRAM and I got a score of 66.6 fps. Is it me or does this seem
>REALLY low? The card is PCI. Any suggestions/comparisons? Thanks.
>Brian Gingold <br...@primenet.com>
That's exactly the same score as I get on my P90/Mach64. What kind of
motherboard do you have? I've got an ASUS with the SIS chipset.
Shane Scheikowski
>>>>1. If you absolutely can't wait 6 months, get either a Matrox Millenium
>>>> or Diamond Stealth64 2mb min Vram card.
>>>
>>>a Hercules Stingray 64 PCI
>>Why, that would be a waste of money. The Diamond Stealth64 is plenty
>>fast in DOS...and blows Hercules away in windows...
>Ah - do you have empirical evidence? I doubt it raelly
>blows away the Stingray 64 in windows (though its probably faster)
>but if you care more about DOS games then the Hercules Stingray
>is probably faster than the Stealth.
I have just purchased a Herc Stingary 64 PCI 2mb card and the
performance in Windows 95 is excellent. 90.9 fps. On a P100 with
32megs of ram. Dos performance is even better coming is at over the
scale 100 fps+
>And what do you mean by waste of money? I wouldnt be surprised if
>the stealth64 was more expensive than Stingray 64
>Denis Papp dp...@amisk.cs.ualberta.ca
Your absolutely correct Denis, the Stealth64 is more expensive than
the Stingary 64. I'd recommend the Stingary 64 to everyone for value!
gior...@ix.netcom.com
>Huh??? The Maxtrox is not faster in DOS from the marks I've seen. And
>isn't it VERY expensive (like $300+?????) The D.Stealth with VRAM can be
>gotten for $225....
>Phil Epstein
The Matrox Millenium is NOT an expensive card. One can get it for
$275-300. I doubt very much that you can get the Stealth with VRAM for
$225. That would be the price of the DRAM version.
I would recommend the Millenium to anyone who wants a fast DOS and
Windows card with 3D capabilities (albeit limited but much more
advanced than the vast majority of the graphics cards on the market).
Michael Sam
>br...@primenet.com (Brian Gingold) wrote:
>>Brian Gingold <br...@primenet.com>
>Jay
>zipu...@direct.ca
On my Pentium 66mhz clone (Gigabyte motherboard), with an ATI Graphics
Xpression, Mach64, 2 MEG DRAM card, I get a frame rate of only 62.5.
Phil Epstein
Shane Scheikowski <Alk...@mailbox.uq.oz.au> wrote:
I said this here:
>>>Why, that would be a waste of money. The Diamond Stealth64 is plenty
>>>fast in DOS...and blows Hercules away in windows...
This was Denis:
>>Ah - do you have empirical evidence? I doubt it raelly
>>blows away the Stingray 64 in windows (though its probably faster)
>>but if you care more about DOS games then the Hercules Stingray
>>is probably faster than the Stealth.
Here's Shane: (damn this is confusing :)
>I have just purchased a Herc Stingary 64 PCI 2mb card and the
>performance in Windows 95 is excellent. 90.9 fps. On a P100 with
>32megs of ram. Dos performance is even better coming is at over the
>scale 100 fps+
How did you measure fps in Win95? And are you using Win95 GOLD (just out
of curiosity). And when you say 100 fps+, I assume you mean 100.0? With
my p100 with 16megs of ram and the Diamond Stealth 64 PCI w/2MB DRAM I
get 90.9 normally and 100.0 with a clean boot. So Hercules is NOT faster
than Stealth in DOS. And when I said Stealth was better than the
Hercules in Windows, I wasn't talking about Win95, I was talking about
Win 3.1(1), since from what I understand, Win95 will "equalize" out video
scores a little more...
Denis said this:
>>And what do you mean by waste of money? I wouldnt be surprised if
>>the stealth64 was more expensive than Stingray 64
>Your absolutely correct Denis, the Stealth64 is more expensive than
>the Stingary 64. I'd recommend the Stingary 64 to everyone for value!
How much did you pay Shane? I paid $159 for my Diamond Stealth 64 PCI
w/2MB DRAM, I'd be surprised if you go the Stingray for less than that.
I got it at a local computer show, not some wholesaler so that is a price
anyone could get if they looked around.
Phil Epstein
Robert Sanheim
ph...@spork.acs.umbc.edu (Phil Epstein) writes
----- Why, that would be a waste of money. The Diamond Stealth64 is plenty
----- fast in DOS...and blows Hercules away in windows...
Denis R. Papp (dp...@falun.cs.ualberta.ca) wrote
- Ah - do you have empirical evidence? I doubt it raelly
- blows away the Stingray 64 in windows (though its probably faster)
Considering that win95 is coming out, and the Stealth is a faster card in
Windows, I think the Stealth would be the best choice. Whether or not
you like the interface of Win95, or the fact that its made by Microsoft,
or whatever, by mid 96 I'd say most games will be coming out for it.
Granted, the Stealth has better performance in win 3.11, not 95, but I
think the same design of the Stealth that gives it better win 3.11 speed
would also give it better win 95 speed.
I think alot of those gamers out there who bought vid cards great in DOS
but terrible in windows ("well I only use Win for a few apps, what I
really need is game performance.") are going to be in shock when EVERY
major game company is releasing their games on win 95 only.
Rob
: --
: Denis Papp dp...@amisk.cs.ualberta.ca
: http://ugweb.cs.ualberta.ca/~dpapp
: No comment.
Nick Lindert
--
Nick Lindert
nlin...@cory.eecs.berkeley.edu
Phil Epstein
>ph...@spork.acs.umbc.edu (Phil Epstein) wrote:
>
>>Huh??? The Maxtrox is not faster in DOS from the marks I've seen. And
>>isn't it VERY expensive (like $300+?????) The D.Stealth with VRAM can be
>>gotten for $225....
>
>>Phil Epstein
>
>The Matrox Millenium is NOT an expensive card. One can get it for
>$275-300. I doubt very much that you can get the Stealth with VRAM for
>$225. That would be the price of the DRAM version.
Ok, well I said $300+ so I wasn't TOO far off. And you can doubt it all
you want but that doesn't make you right. I have SEEN the Stealth 64
VRAM for $250 and heard it offered for less. And that is NOT the price
of the DRAM version because my Stealth 64 w/2MB DRAM was $159.
>I would recommend the Millenium to anyone who wants a fast DOS and
>Windows card with 3D capabilities (albeit limited but much more
>advanced than the vast majority of the graphics cards on the market).
Yeah and have fun with the ONE game that uses it's 3D capabilities
(NASCAR). At least I've only heard of one...
Phil Epstein
Jon Nisbet
: something like that) that speeds up the write to the card, gets about 30%
: FASTER....where it is I haven't a clue, idiota didn't say where it was, just
: 'available at any DOS site'....yeah, not on this planet....
CTPCI.EXE is at ftp.uni-paderborn.de /ct/pci/ctpci.exe or something
really similar.
Hope that helps.
I got the program, but it doesn't seem to do anything for me. I heard a
remark that it fixes only the older PCI motherboards that had the
problem. Maybe mine is one of the new and improved motherboards... ooh!
Jon
KarmaRoach
4 Meg VRAM card and my 3DBench is 40 fps.
In Windows, the card is great, but Dos is pretty sad (only 512k). I was
thinking about buying the #9 FXMotion 771 card which is supposed to have
much better Dos performance and almost as good Windows performance as the
Imagine 128. Does anyone have any benchmarks for the 771 card? Or does
#9 just suck when it comes to Dos? Does it matter with Windows 95 coming
out? Am I better off with a kick ass Windows card in the long run? Right
now I can't play hi-res Dos games, and I feel i should be able to with a
P100.
Thanks for any info.
KarmaRoach
Capt Stern
Alk...@mailbox.uq.oz.au (Shane Scheikowski) wrote:
>
>>>>>1. If you absolutely can't wait 6 months, get either a Matrox Millenium
>>>>> or Diamond Stealth64 2mb min Vram card.
>>>>
>>>>Do you use windows a lot? If you want DOS games speed get
>>>>a Hercules Stingray 64 PCI
>
>
>>is probably faster than the Stealth.
>
>performance in Windows 95 is excellent. 90.9 fps. On a P100 with
>32megs of ram. Dos performance is even better coming is at over the
>scale 100 fps+
>
>>the stealth64 was more expensive than Stingray 64
>
>
>Your absolutely correct Denis, the Stealth64 is more expensive than
>the Stingary 64. I'd recommend the Stingary 64 to everyone for value!
>
>
game group. Further more, I paid less for my Diamond Stealth 64 then my
friend did for his Stingray, and far less then an ATI. They're all fine
cards, those who own Stingray's, Stealth's or ATI's have no reason to bother
switching. Anyone interested in preformance can post to relevant newsgroups,
or buy a magazine.
jason thomas
>
>In article <40psp9$2...@news.rain.org> jni...@rain.org (Jon Nisbet) writes:
>
>>That's pretty good. Feel lucky. My P90 with Mach64 gives me 77 fps.
>
>Something wrong with my system? I'm running a P90 with 16MB RAM and an ATI
>Mach 64 / 2MB DRAM and I got a score of 66.6 fps. Is it me or does this seem
>REALLY low? The card is PCI. Any suggestions/comparisons? Thanks.
>
>Brian Gingold <br...@primenet.com>
ALERT! I had exactly the same score on my identical system. I was able
to get 3dbench to 71.4 or something like that. What the problem is, as
I understand it, is that the ATI burst cache code is buggy. There's a
bios setting to enable/disable this feature; if you disable it, it will
run faster. This would be under chipset options or something of the sort.
This leads me to believe that if the code was NOT buggy and you had the
option enabled, you would see a dramatic improvement. Perhaps ATI has
a driver update for this? Additionally, I installed UNIVBE, a shareware
vesa driver, and did not notice any difference. Now I can run MWII in
320X200 perfectly smoothly, and playably in 640, though I am a smoothness
junkie.
-Jason
SkiBum [CSD]
: -Jason
I've got a DX4-100, and a Mach 64 / 2MB Vram, and get 76.9 if I
run at 120... Acer AP41 with SIS Chipset.
--
Brad Borgald, CRT | p7...@unb.ca
Network Technician | ski...@sauron.csd.unb.ca
Computing Services | bbor...@hhnov1.unb.ca
University of New Brunswick | Solomon, The North Face, No Fear!
Fredericton, NB, Canada | Nothing but C for me, BSc.EE
____ _ _ ____
/ ___|| | _(_) __ ) _ _ _ __ ___
Just a \___ \| |/ / | _ \| | | | '_ ` _ \ stuck in
___) | <| | |_) | |_| | | | | | | the east!
|____/|_|\_\_|____/ \__,_|_| |_| |_|
Daniel Gelinas
>zipu...@direct.ca (J/K Zipursky) wrote:
>>br...@primenet.com (Brian Gingold) wrote:
>>>In article <40psp9$2...@news.rain.org> jni...@rain.org (Jon Nisbet) writes:
>>>>That's pretty good. Feel lucky. My P90 with Mach64 gives me 77 fps.
>>>Something wrong with my system? I'm running a P90 with 16MB RAM and an ATI
>>>Mach 64 / 2MB DRAM and I got a score of 66.6 fps. Is it me or does this seem
> ^^^^^^
>Notice, DRAM is slower than VRAM. I have 2 megs of VRAM on a ATI Mach
>64 PCI, running on a P90, I get 71.4 fps. This number does not change
>regardless of whatever I do to tune it, either slower or faster. Btw,
>I have a Intel Premiere II aka "Plato" MB.
Hmm, I must be doing really well then. I have a 486dx2/100 (80 overclocked)
and I get 71.2 with a regular ET4000.
Daniel Gelinas
--
Daniel Gelinas
sup...@cam.org
gel...@cam.org
Phil Epstein
>>>Mach 64 / 2MB DRAM and I got a score of 66.6 fps. Is it me or does this seem
> ^^^^^^
>
>Notice, DRAM is slower than VRAM. I have 2 megs of VRAM on a ATI Mach
>64 PCI, running on a P90, I get 71.4 fps. This number does not change
>regardless of whatever I do to tune it, either slower or faster. Btw,
>I have a Intel Premiere II aka "Plato" MB.
While your statement that DRAM is slower than VRAM is true, in this case
it's misleading. You won't experience any noticeable difference in DOS
performance with DRAM compared to VRAM. The speed of VRAM comes into
play in situations like Windows with 15, 16 and 24-bit color (32k, 64k,
16.8 million respectively). I doubt 3DBench would show any difference
between say the Diamond Stealth 64 w/DRAM and the same card with VRAM.
Phil Epstein
Walter Benzing
>>CTPCI.EXE is at ftp.uni-paderborn.de /ct/pci/ctpci.exe or something
>>really similar.
>Achtung! It's all in German - can anyone provide a translation?
Here is what I found (I couldn't run it because it explicitly warns about
using it on non pci boards and my pci sits at home) :
ctpci is mostly a tool to get information about your PCI board, additionally
it allows to dis-/enable different PCI burst modi (cpu-> pci, host ->memory).
On Intel Neptun and Mercury boards it automatically recognizes the pci state.
BUT ctpci won't let you store the state, so it's only of limited use (IMHO
of course) if you want to permanently speed up your maschine. So probably it's
ok to check out the effect of different pci settings with ctpci, but I couldn't
find anything about removing a bug in old pci chip sets.
bye,
Walter
Martin Wickman
>In article <brian.5....@primenet.com>, br...@primenet.com (Brian Gingold) says:
>>
>>In article <40psp9$2...@news.rain.org> jni...@rain.org (Jon Nisbet) writes:
>>
>>>That's pretty good. Feel lucky. My P90 with Mach64 gives me 77 fps.
>>
>>Something wrong with my system? I'm running a P90 with 16MB RAM and an ATI
>>Mach 64 / 2MB DRAM and I got a score of 66.6 fps. Is it me or does this seem
>>REALLY low? The card is PCI. Any suggestions/comparisons? Thanks.
>>
>>Brian Gingold <br...@primenet.com>
>ALERT! I had exactly the same score on my identical system. I was able
>to get 3dbench to 71.4 or something like that. What the problem is, as
>I understand it, is that the ATI burst cache code is buggy. There's a
>bios setting to enable/disable this feature; if you disable it, it will
>run faster. This would be under chipset options or something of the sort.
>This leads me to believe that if the code was NOT buggy and you had the
>option enabled, you would see a dramatic improvement. Perhaps ATI has
>a driver update for this?
I also get 71.4!
Now, where do I disable the bust cache thingey? Do you mean the
mother board BIOS or the Video cards BIOS?
>Additionally, I installed UNIVBE, a shareware
>vesa driver, and did not notice any difference. Now I can run MWII in
>320X200 perfectly smoothly, and playably in 640, though I am a smoothness
>junkie.
Sorry if I don't get this clear, you installed UNIVBE and did not
notice any difference. Then you states that you now can run ...
perfecly smoothly.
--
martin....@mailbox.swipnet.se
"Windows: from the guys who brought you EDLIN"
Martin Wickman
[my graphics card is better than your graphics card...]
>This is completely off topic, please don't post anymore about video cards in a
>game group. Further more, I paid less for my Diamond Stealth 64 then my
>friend did for his Stingray, and far less then an ATI. They're all fine
>cards, those who own Stingray's, Stealth's or ATI's have no reason to bother
>switching. Anyone interested in preformance can post to relevant newsgroups,
>or buy a magazine.
I agree that it is off topic, but I think talking about video
cards is perfectly ok, *as long as it relates to computer games*.
When playing games like doom or descent, you better have a good
graphics card. So why not discuss it?
Steve Unruh
>
>>>>That's pretty good. Feel lucky. My P90 with Mach64 gives me 77 fps.
>
>>>Something wrong with my system? I'm running a P90 with 16MB RAM and an ATI
>>>Mach 64 / 2MB DRAM and I got a score of 66.6 fps. Is it me or does this seem
>
>Notice, DRAM is slower than VRAM. I have 2 megs of VRAM on a ATI Mach
>64 PCI, running on a P90, I get 71.4 fps. This number does not change
>regardless of whatever I do to tune it, either slower or faster. Btw,
>I have a Intel Premiere II aka "Plato" MB.
i ran 3dbench on my dx2/50 with orchid kelvin 64 2mb dram vlb gave me 35.7
then i replaced the motherboard and cpu with an AMD DX4/120 and now i get
79.6 with the same video card!
total cost was under $350.
--
This article is Copyrighted, 1995, by Steven L. Unruh, who hereby explicitly
withholds permission of transmission from Microsoft Corporation. By
transmitting this article, Microsoft Corporation agrees to pay
Steven L. Unruh ten million United States dollars (US$10,000,000), due N30.
Slang
Martin Wickman (martin....@mailbox.swipnet.se) wrote:
: I agree that it is off topic, but I think talking about video
: cards is perfectly ok, *as long as it relates to computer games*.
: When playing games like doom or descent, you better have a good
: graphics card. So why not discuss it?
: --
: martin....@mailbox.swipnet.se
: "Windows: from the guys who brought you EDLIN"
I agree completely with Martin.Graphics cards are a perfectly valid topic
in a games group because of their relation to good gaming performance.The
previous poster is just being another self proclaimed net-cop.I for one
ended up buying a Hercules Stingray due to peoples opinions in gameing groups
and therefore appreciate reading such information.BTW I paid $150.00
dollars less for the Hercules than I would if I had bought a Diamond
Stealth 2mb Vram.I tried the Diamond Stealth and I can honestly say for
Dos the Hercules is the clear winner.Diamond is faster in Windows but it
doesn't blow away the Hercules by any means.Hercules has better utilities
and the installation was simple also.On a last note...if you don't like off
topic posts then don't read them.
Steve
--
"Through tattered clothes small vices do appear;
Robes and furred gowns hide all."
William Shakespeare
M R
karma...@aol.com "KarmaRoach" writes:
> Everyone here has me beat. I have a Dell P100 with the #9 Imagine 128 bit
> 4 Meg VRAM card and my 3DBench is 40 fps.
I would have that checked out if I was you, my p100 with Diamond Stealth64
DRAM gives 90.9.
Either 3dbench is throwing a wobbly or your system is f******.
--
Mark Rogers
+:+:+ Procrastinate now and avoid the rush. +:+:+
+:+:+ Vibro Blades - you gotta love em. +:+:+
T Orion
meg card. 3DBench score- 83.3. From other scores I've seen, thats about
right for an optimized P-90.So a new video card could very well help you.
I also installed UNIBE5, and I did notice a much smoother frame rate with
all options running.
T Orion
Jason Liao
>score? Could you post the results? Also, does anyone know whether 3DBENCH
is
>a good benchmark for P90's and above running in the higher-res graphics
modes?
No, it is not. Since 3DBench only measures speed at 320x200, it is pretty much
meaningless for the high-res games and stuff.
Dominick Maraglia
thanks
rooster
John Spalding
[...]
>>ALERT! I had exactly the same score on my identical system. I was able
>>to get 3dbench to 71.4 or something like that. What the problem is, as
>>I understand it, is that the ATI burst cache code is buggy. There's a
>>bios setting to enable/disable this feature; if you disable it, it will
>>run faster. This would be under chipset options or something of the sort.
>>This leads me to believe that if the code was NOT buggy and you had the
>>option enabled, you would see a dramatic improvement. Perhaps ATI has
>>a driver update for this?
>I also get 71.4!
>Now, where do I disable the bust cache thingey? Do you mean the
>mother board BIOS or the Video cards BIOS?
>>Additionally, I installed UNIVBE, a shareware
>>vesa driver, and did not notice any difference. Now I can run MWII in
>>320X200 perfectly smoothly, and playably in 640, though I am a smoothness
>>junkie.
I also have a P90 (GK2000) with ATI Mach64 2MB VRAM. For 3DBENCH, CTPCI
won't help, nor will UNIVBE5, nor will avoiding memory managers. I tried
every combination and the score is *always* 71.4. I have tried all
combinations in MW2, and I can't see I see any difference in 640x480.
Has anyone had this type of system and changed video cards to improve the
score? Could you post the results? Also, does anyone know whether 3DBENCH is
a good benchmark for P90's and above running in the higher-res graphics modes?
John
------------------------------------------------------
------------------ John Spalding ---------------------
-------------- spal...@psl.nmsu.edu -----------------
-- Physical Science Lab/New Mexico State University --
------------------------------------------------------
Shane Scheikowski
>This is completely off topic, please don't post anymore about video cards in a
>game group. Further more, I paid less for my Diamond Stealth 64 then my
>friend did for his Stingray, and far less then an ATI. They're all fine
>cards, those who own Stingray's, Stealth's or ATI's have no reason to bother
>switching. Anyone interested in preformance can post to relevant newsgroups,
>or buy a magazine.
Rubbish, Video cards are now a very important item to consider when
purchasing a game.
PS Your friend got ripped off.
Gino Huang
>for p90? If so how can I improve it?
Gino
Michael Sam
>thanks
>rooster
It's just the release of Windows 95 that Microsoft finally sent to be
stamped on CDs for commercial release.
Mike Herauf
nd Stealth 64 then >my friend did for his Stingray, and far less then an ATI. They're all fine
to relevant >newsgroups, or buy a magazine.
Or they can not listen to you, and post right here. Video cards are often
the topic of this group (and should be), and there have been no complaints
(until now). This is a machine-specific game group, so related hardware is
appropriate.
I love it when people try to police the net, especially hypocrites who say
not to do something, then immediately do it themselves in the same "breath",
just as you did.
Mike
P.S. Your first and fourth commas should be semicolons, "Furthermore" is one
word, plural nouns don't carry apostrophes, and you mispelled "performance".
Mike Herauf
coo...@txdirect.net
The #9 Imagine 128 blazes under Windows. However the card is crap under DOS. At this
point the only solution is to get a different card.
Douglas Cooper
Paul Galloway
: >In article <40psp9$2...@news.rain.org> jni...@rain.org (Jon Nisbet) writes:
: >>That's pretty good. Feel lucky. My P90 with Mach64 gives me 77 fps.
: >Something wrong with my system? I'm running a P90 with 16MB RAM and an ATI
: >Mach 64 / 2MB DRAM and I got a score of 66.6 fps. Is it me or does this seem
: >REALLY low? The card is PCI. Any suggestions/comparisons? Thanks.
: >Brian Gingold <br...@primenet.com>
: That's exactly the same score as I get on my P90/Mach64. What kind of
: motherboard do you have? I've got an ASUS with the SIS chipset.
: Jay
: zipu...@direct.ca
I'm not sure what's going on here, but I just got a Gateway 2000 P100
with 16MB EDO RAM and an ATI Mach 64 / 2MB DRAM. Running 3dbench on it
"right out of the box" yielded a 90.9 fps. I'm not complaining, mind
you, but I am a bit puzzled. I haven't looked inside to see who makes
the motherboard yet.
Anyone have any ideas as to what makes the difference here?
PaulG
brian jones
: Will Day wrote:
: bye,
: Walter
I have heard all about this ctcpi and the amazing things it is
supposed to do for Mach64 video cards when you disable PCI burst mode
(i.e. ctpci -b). I have an ATI GPT PCI 2m vram and an Intel "Plato"
motherboard. When I try and run this program it just locks up. I have
no options in my cmos settings to disable PCI burst mode. Anyone else
have this problem or even better, a solution?
BTW 71.4 fps 3Dbench, UniVBE51 loaded - no difference.
--
- Brian E. Jones
| University of Nebraska-Lincoln Physics & Astronomy |
| Center for Materials Research and Analysis b...@unlinfo.unl.edu |
===========================================--> <-====================
Alfred Potrzebie
[discussion of video cards snipped]
>This is completely off topic, please don't post anymore about video cards in a
>game group. Further more, I paid less for my Diamond Stealth 64 then my
>friend did for his Stingray, and far less then an ATI. They're all fine
>cards, those who own Stingray's, Stealth's or ATI's have no reason to bother
>switching. Anyone interested in preformance can post to relevant newsgroups,
>or buy a magazine.
Let's see here...cptstern@wolfe.net (Capt Stern) thinks that
discussing which video card is best for games is off topic in a games
group, and suggests we shouldn't post about them anymore. He then
goes on to discuss video cards in these same groups. Uh, okay.
In a previous post, cpts...@wolfe.net (Capt Stern) wrote:
>I'd have to agree that it's quite easy to setup Win95 for an ISP and ignore
>MSN altogether. Thats what I did. I also used ROBODUN since it makes it
>easier to login, but it's optional.
So, discussion of video cards is bad, but it's okay to talk about:
Win95 (not a game), Internet providers (not a game), Microsoft Network
(not a game), ROBODUN (not a game) in a games newsgroup.
I can sum up cpts...@wolfe.net (Capt Stern) in one word: clown.
miw
-----------------...@eden.com--------------------------
"It is very important to understand that the lint buildup in between
Mel Torme's inner left thigh and his scrotum is perhaps the greatest
threat posed to stability of the political environment of the United
States since Maureen McGovern's diarrhea on May 3, 1979. We must
ingest massive quantities of Mylanta and Cheerios and listen to Eddie
Albert chant his mantra to offset the potentially hazardous
consequences. That is all." -- Candy-Colored Clown
Alfred Potrzebie
>>64 PCI, running on a P90, I get 71.4 fps. This number does not change
>>regardless of whatever I do to tune it, either slower or faster. Btw,
>>I have a Intel Premiere II aka "Plato" MB.
DRAM is only slower than VRAM for hi-res, hi color-depth graphics.
For 320x200 VGA graphics like 3d bench, the video memory is not the
bottleneck. In fact, I've seen benchmark score to indicate that the
VRAM versions of some cards, like the Diamond Stealth 64, are actually
SLOWER than the DRAM versions at this resolution.
Philip Epstein
>Has anyone had this type of system and changed video cards to improve the
>score? Could you post the results? Also, does anyone know whether 3DBENCH is
>a good benchmark for P90's and above running in the higher-res graphics modes?
I can tell you for certain that 3DBench is kinda useless when you're
talking about games that don't run in 320x200 because that's what the
program tests fps in. BUT you could extrapolate from a high score at
low-res to a high-score in hi-res, but that won't always be true.
Some cards may be better at the higher resolutions and slower at the
lower ones (why, I have no fucking idea, it certainly sounds dumb to
me but I've heard that it happens....)
Phil Epstein
Matt Thorn
John Spalding <spal...@psl.nmsu.edu> wrote:
[deleted for bandwidth's sake]
>Has anyone had this type of system and changed video cards to improve the
>score? Could you post the results? Also, does anyone know whether 3DBENCH is
>a good benchmark for P90's and above running in the higher-res graphics modes?
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------
>------------------ John Spalding ---------------------
>-------------- spal...@psl.nmsu.edu -----------------
>-- Physical Science Lab/New Mexico State University --
>------------------------------------------------------
>
I have an ATI GPT 2MB VRAM and used to have an Intel Plato/
Premiere II motherboard. Apparently, the cpu->PCI burst on the ATI sucks.
The ctpci program is supposed to be able to disable cpu->pci burst, but I
never had any success using this program. I got a lot of mail from people
who did have success with it, so you might as well try it. The standard ATI
score on 3DBench with the neptune chipset was 71.4 fps for me. I recently
purchased an ASUS mboard with the new Triton chipset, but kept my same CPU
(90 Mhz). Without changing anything, the new 3D Bench score was 83.3fps,
quite a nice jump. I then went into the BIOS and disabled CPU->PCI burst
(not a BIOS option on the Plato), and my 3D Bench score jumped up to 90.4
fps or something close to that. Interesting. So, it may be worth your while
to upgrade motherboards, or just ditch the ATI. I got 20 extra fps just by
switching motherboards...
David B. Feig
: In article <40psp9$2...@news.rain.org> jni...@rain.org (Jon Nisbet) writes:
: >That's pretty good. Feel lucky. My P90 with Mach64 gives me 77 fps.
: Something wrong with my system? I'm running a P90 with 16MB RAM and an ATI
: Mach 64 / 2MB DRAM and I got a score of 66.6 fps. Is it me or does this seem
: REALLY low? The card is PCI. Any suggestions/comparisons? Thanks.
: Brian Gingold <br...@primenet.com>
I have a asus p54tp4, p-90, triton chipset, and Mach 64 with 2 meg of
dram. I get a 3d bench score of 71.4 fps.
Should I fool with some of the pci settings, or disable burst mode?
Later
D. Feig
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Millions of creatures roam the | Igu...@liii.com
earth unseen, both when we wake | http:\\www.liii.com\~iguana
and when we sleep. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"How soon is now?"
Philip Epstein
>pa...@gate.net (Paul Galloway) wrote:
>>I'm not sure what's going on here, but I just got a Gateway 2000 P100
>>with 16MB EDO RAM and an ATI Mach 64 / 2MB DRAM. Running 3dbench on it
>>"right out of the box" yielded a 90.9 fps. I'm not complaining, mind
>>you, but I am a bit puzzled. I haven't looked inside to see who makes
>>the motherboard yet.
>>Anyone have any ideas as to what makes the difference here?
That's not a bad score, that's what you SHOULD be getting.
>Yes I do, it's all to do with the Triton chipset wich has a much
>faster pci-bus speed, I tested a P90 with and without triton and I got
>a 3Dbench of around 65fps without and of 90.9 with triton chipset.
A point needs to be made here: Are you running a CLEAN boot or with
all your TSRs and drivers loaded? That can make a significant
difference and lots of people don't mention it. My p100 w/16MB RAM
and a Diamond Stealth 64 w/2MB DRAM will give me 90.9 fps if I do my
normal boot (lots o' drivers :) BUT if I run a clean boot I will get
100.0 fps. So don't quote scores unless you say whether or not you
clean-booted...
Phil Epstein
Stijn Sterckx
>J/K Zipursky (zipu...@direct.ca) wrote:
>: br...@primenet.com (Brian Gingold) wrote:
>: >In article <40psp9$2...@news.rain.org> jni...@rain.org (Jon Nisbet) writes:
>: >>That's pretty good. Feel lucky. My P90 with Mach64 gives me 77 fps.
>: >Something wrong with my system? I'm running a P90 with 16MB RAM and an ATI
>: >Mach 64 / 2MB DRAM and I got a score of 66.6 fps. Is it me or does this seem
>: >REALLY low? The card is PCI. Any suggestions/comparisons? Thanks.
>: >Brian Gingold <br...@primenet.com>
>: That's exactly the same score as I get on my P90/Mach64. What kind of
>: motherboard do you have? I've got an ASUS with the SIS chipset.
>: Jay
>: zipu...@direct.ca
>I'm not sure what's going on here, but I just got a Gateway 2000 P100
>with 16MB EDO RAM and an ATI Mach 64 / 2MB DRAM. Running 3dbench on it
>"right out of the box" yielded a 90.9 fps. I'm not complaining, mind
>you, but I am a bit puzzled. I haven't looked inside to see who makes
>the motherboard yet.
>Anyone have any ideas as to what makes the difference here?
Yes I do, it's all to do with the Triton chipset wich has a much
faster pci-bus speed, I tested a P90 with and without triton and I got
a 3Dbench of around 65fps without and of 90.9 with triton chipset.
Also when you do landmark's graphic speed I get about the double
throughput with triton chipset.
>PaulG
Robert John Byrne
>
> T Orion
I've got a P-90 w/ 8megs of RAM, and an ATI MACH 64 video card w/ 2MB
DRAM. I get 44.5 fps with 3dbench. What gives?
Douglas Cronkhite
On my DX4-100(AMD) w/12 megs RAM, Cirrus Logic 5434 2mb 64 bit VLB
card.. I get a 3d bench of 50.0 How does this compare to other ratings
of similar systems ?? Also.. How is the 5434 as a dos card ?? windows
?? I don't really know.. I prefer reply's from people who know.. not
just some parrot who heard Cirrus Logic sucks one day..
Doug Cronkhite
Fun...@IX.NETCOM.COM
Martin Wickman
>Walter Benzing (ben...@iegi01.etec.uni-karlsruhe.de) wrote:
>: Will Day wrote:
>: >>CTPCI.EXE is at ftp.uni-paderborn.de /ct/pci/ctpci.exe or something
>: >>really similar.
>: >Achtung! It's all in German - can anyone provide a translation?
>: Here is what I found (I couldn't run it because it explicitly warns about
>: using it on non pci boards and my pci sits at home) :
>: ctpci is mostly a tool to get information about your PCI board, additionally
>: it allows to dis-/enable different PCI burst modi (cpu-> pci, host ->memory).
>: On Intel Neptun and Mercury boards it automatically recognizes the pci state.
>: BUT ctpci won't let you store the state, so it's only of limited use (IMHO
>: of course) if you want to permanently speed up your maschine. So probably it's
>: ok to check out the effect of different pci settings with ctpci, but I couldn't
>: find anything about removing a bug in old pci chip sets.
>: bye,
>: Walter
> I have heard all about this ctcpi and the amazing things it is
>supposed to do for Mach64 video cards when you disable PCI burst mode
>(i.e. ctpci -b). I have an ATI GPT PCI 2m vram and an Intel "Plato"
>motherboard. When I try and run this program it just locks up. I have
>no options in my cmos settings to disable PCI burst mode. Anyone else
>have this problem or even better, a solution?
>BTW 71.4 fps 3Dbench, UniVBE51 loaded - no difference.
There is no difference w/ or w/o ctpci! I have tried it, the
3dbench scroes remained the same :(