Awful ATI 9600 pro perfomance
nothing at this link!
This topic was started by goliath,
hi,
i brought a connect3d ATI radeon 9600 pro after hearing about how good it was; i want 2 play doom3 when it comes out!
however the performance is awful; i only get 8900 in 3dmark 2001!! my GF4MX440 managed 5800!! From the reviews shouldnt i be nearing 12000?
this seems to have been a waste of money, or i have sumthing wrong with my system, which is unlikely as ive had it for 9 months and not 1 hardware prob.
This was my first ATI card and i doubt that i will buy another one; unreal tournament 2003 perfomance sucks as well:
Flyby: 125FPS
Botmatch: 45FPS
Thats at 1024*768; when i read the reviews the scores were better! my GF4MX gets 42 in the botmatch which is supposed to be as close to in game as possible!! also on the big maps even at default settings theres a horrible lag!!
I have played halo and thats pure painful so i returned it; powerpoint is a better slideslow!!!
i have never really o/cd nething as my cpu temp is always 47C+ (i have the stick cooler and 1 case fan with the PSU fan). Is there sumthing really wrong with my pc? i have catalyst 3.7.
here is the sys spec:
P4 2ghz
512DDR RAM @266mhz CL2.5
MSI 845 AR motherboard with AGP 4x
IBM Deskstar 120GXP 80gb HD
Quantum Fireball 15GB
ATI Radeon 9600 pro 128mb
LG CDRW/DVD combo
MSI 52XCDROM
Please help me!!! all i want to do is 2 play the odd game at max settings; i have had enuff crappy cards: intel 810; GF4MX now this!! i think that i will have to look at an XBOX to get good gaming... :oops:
i brought a connect3d ATI radeon 9600 pro after hearing about how good it was; i want 2 play doom3 when it comes out!
however the performance is awful; i only get 8900 in 3dmark 2001!! my GF4MX440 managed 5800!! From the reviews shouldnt i be nearing 12000?
this seems to have been a waste of money, or i have sumthing wrong with my system, which is unlikely as ive had it for 9 months and not 1 hardware prob.
This was my first ATI card and i doubt that i will buy another one; unreal tournament 2003 perfomance sucks as well:
Flyby: 125FPS
Botmatch: 45FPS
Thats at 1024*768; when i read the reviews the scores were better! my GF4MX gets 42 in the botmatch which is supposed to be as close to in game as possible!! also on the big maps even at default settings theres a horrible lag!!
I have played halo and thats pure painful so i returned it; powerpoint is a better slideslow!!!
i have never really o/cd nething as my cpu temp is always 47C+ (i have the stick cooler and 1 case fan with the PSU fan). Is there sumthing really wrong with my pc? i have catalyst 3.7.
here is the sys spec:
P4 2ghz
512DDR RAM @266mhz CL2.5
MSI 845 AR motherboard with AGP 4x
IBM Deskstar 120GXP 80gb HD
Quantum Fireball 15GB
ATI Radeon 9600 pro 128mb
LG CDRW/DVD combo
MSI 52XCDROM
Please help me!!! all i want to do is 2 play the odd game at max settings; i have had enuff crappy cards: intel 810; GF4MX now this!! i think that i will have to look at an XBOX to get good gaming... :oops:
Participate on our website and join the conversation
This topic is archived. New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast.
Responses to this topic
Um, sorry to tell you this, but there could be 1000's of things wrong.
Most likely its a faulty card.
If you want someone to help you maybe you should post your exact system specifications, and not just "generic" non desciptive remarks.
For example I have a Gigabyte FN-L1 mainboard, 2500 barton cpu, 2 sticks of pc3200 cl 2.5 memory, all running stock speeds. My vid card is a GF3 special edition TI500 (with the faster mem) I have it running at 100mhz AGP bus speed (with a + .1 voltage) with overclocked mem 600mhz and a core speed of 275 (I modified the cooling on the vid card).
Thats just my basic system specs, I could go into even more detail about my bios settings.
Something you might want to check, is your AGP aperature setting at or above 64 meg? If its below 64 that will disable any benefit of AGP all together. Also, you do realize that framerates are also dependant on monitor refresh rate? If you have set your graphics card to force vsync you could be limiting your frame rates in the demos.
Tweaking your memory / bios settings is a good place to start.
Most likely its a faulty card.
If you want someone to help you maybe you should post your exact system specifications, and not just "generic" non desciptive remarks.
For example I have a Gigabyte FN-L1 mainboard, 2500 barton cpu, 2 sticks of pc3200 cl 2.5 memory, all running stock speeds. My vid card is a GF3 special edition TI500 (with the faster mem) I have it running at 100mhz AGP bus speed (with a + .1 voltage) with overclocked mem 600mhz and a core speed of 275 (I modified the cooling on the vid card).
Thats just my basic system specs, I could go into even more detail about my bios settings.
Something you might want to check, is your AGP aperature setting at or above 64 meg? If its below 64 that will disable any benefit of AGP all together. Also, you do realize that framerates are also dependant on monitor refresh rate? If you have set your graphics card to force vsync you could be limiting your frame rates in the demos.
Tweaking your memory / bios settings is a good place to start.
Putting AGP aperture above 64 MB is pointless unless your video card has very little memory. AGP aperture is how much physical RAM the system sets aside for AGP texturing if needed. There is no reason to set this high, and if it's below 64 MB, it doesn't "disable" AGP, where do you people come up with this stuff? In another thread someone said "Put it as high as you can, even if it's more than 512 MB" Why? That serves no purpose. Similarly, for a 128 MB card, 64 MB is probably more than enough. If you don't know what you're talking about, don't. In any case, you do bring up a good point about vsync. 10 bucks says it's enabled, and that would be why your scores are so crappy.
AGP aperature does have a drastic effect, but its at 16 meg setting not 64. I don't know why I had 64 in my head today, I am getting more forgetful as I age.
Anyway, I dare you to lower your agp aperature below 16meg and show me undoctored scores that are the same as it was before you lowerd it.
I know for a fact that if its lower than 16meg in bios it will efectively disable agp 2x, 4x, 8x, and sidebanding, rendering your card a basic agp 1x card.
Do a google and you will see 1000's of posts from reputable sites exaplining the 16meg scenario. So I was wrong abou the number not the effect.
Anyway, I dare you to lower your agp aperature below 16meg and show me undoctored scores that are the same as it was before you lowerd it.
I know for a fact that if its lower than 16meg in bios it will efectively disable agp 2x, 4x, 8x, and sidebanding, rendering your card a basic agp 1x card.
Do a google and you will see 1000's of posts from reputable sites exaplining the 16meg scenario. So I was wrong abou the number not the effect.
Have you guys checked if agp is disabled?
That happened to me...
Check in dxdiag
Or in 3d mark
Or in Rivatuner
If youre running a geforce card ...and an Nforce...and you uninstall the Geforce..for a ati...you need to reInstall the nforce Drivers.....
The gart needs to be installed
It's not a bottleneck...on a 2ghz?
Gimme a break....
Try re-installing your motherboard drivers
That happened to me...
Check in dxdiag
Or in 3d mark
Or in Rivatuner
If youre running a geforce card ...and an Nforce...and you uninstall the Geforce..for a ati...you need to reInstall the nforce Drivers.....
The gart needs to be installed
It's not a bottleneck...on a 2ghz?
Gimme a break....
Try re-installing your motherboard drivers
ok heres the full spec:
P4 2ghz northwood FSB 400mhz
512 DDR RAM CL2.5 (generic unbranded)
MSI 845 AR motherboard with AGP 4x enabled
Connect3d ati Radeon 9600 pro clocked at 400/600 with fast writes and side band addressing enabled
LG 4320B combo drive
MSI 52X CD ROM drive
XP pro sp1
Now pls sum1 help??
P4 2ghz northwood FSB 400mhz
512 DDR RAM CL2.5 (generic unbranded)
MSI 845 AR motherboard with AGP 4x enabled
Connect3d ati Radeon 9600 pro clocked at 400/600 with fast writes and side band addressing enabled
LG 4320B combo drive
MSI 52X CD ROM drive
XP pro sp1
Now pls sum1 help??
Disable fast writes, not that it will help your problem drastically but it will help for a more stable system, plus the gain from enabling it is pretty much zero. If anyone can show me a gain of 0.5fps with fast writes I'll be impressed.
Was just a "side note" :)
my computer hasnt crashed and died yet and i have had that on it for over 6 months. this is why i really dont want to format it, as ive never had this kind of luck with any o/s!!
also i have recently got halo. after trying to play the game i have given up, as rthe performance is totally unacceptable, even with everything turned off and no AA. is the game code buggy or is my system too slow to handle this kind of game? if so, how will other DX9 games run? i heard that this uses the pixel 2.0 shaders, and it doesnt look ground breaking.
will this be a problem with all DX9 games or is this an isolated problem? if so is there a workaround?
btw: i disabled fast writes and theres no difference in performance.. :(
also i have recently got halo. after trying to play the game i have given up, as rthe performance is totally unacceptable, even with everything turned off and no AA. is the game code buggy or is my system too slow to handle this kind of game? if so, how will other DX9 games run? i heard that this uses the pixel 2.0 shaders, and it doesnt look ground breaking.
will this be a problem with all DX9 games or is this an isolated problem? if so is there a workaround?
btw: i disabled fast writes and theres no difference in performance.. :(
Well I thought Halo was pretty good.
im sorry not to agree with you killerkebab, but i prefer the grafics of unreal 2003 and even serious sam.
the water looks terrible even with the pixel shader 2
i have seen the article; i should be getting 28 fps, but on the graphs in game it shows me to get 25 normally, and 14ish in the gun battles.
is this how its meant to be?
as a side note; when i brought the card one of the transistors was wonky and touching another 1. i nudged the transistor to make it straight..... is there any way the card got damaged so its performing not greatly?
the water looks terrible even with the pixel shader 2
i have seen the article; i should be getting 28 fps, but on the graphs in game it shows me to get 25 normally, and 14ish in the gun battles.
is this how its meant to be?
as a side note; when i brought the card one of the transistors was wonky and touching another 1. i nudged the transistor to make it straight..... is there any way the card got damaged so its performing not greatly?
I dunno I kinda liked Halo's graphics. Although Unreal II is as good without claiming PS 2
Now what would be nice is seeing some real DX9 in action to answer all this hype.
Now what would be nice is seeing some real DX9 in action to answer all this hype.
