GP2 dream video card

Hi everybody I have a 133 with a Diamond stealth 64 2Mb VRAM. Altough the Stealth is lightning fast in windows, I get a very low 177 in GP2 log. I have read in different post that the Millenium and ET6000 are fast. Can anybody advise me.... It looks like the Millenium might be difficult to find in South-Africa, so maybe the ET6000. Is it decent running Windows too. What is the meaning of the 177 in the log? If I get a 400 with another card, by how much will the frame rate increase? Thanks a million JFD

ET6000 is a type of chipset, not a card. It is used in Hercules Dynamite 128, Lightspeed 128 and some others. The Hercules Dynamite 128 is noticably faster than the Matrox Millenium in DOS, and slightly slower in Windows. Check out Sim Racing News hardware sections (address below in my sig) for more info. Hope it helps, Cheers! John _________________________________ __ _____| |_____ __ ________| |__| :| John Wallace | |__| |________ \ :| |::| :| Team WW Racing TSW | |::| | / > :| |::| :|_________________________________| |::| | < / :|__|::|____/ * Sim Racing News * \____|::|__| \ /______:/ \::/ http://sneezy.dcn.ed.ac.uk/simnews/index.htm \::/ \._____\ http://www.math.ohio-state.edu/~harmon/simnews

Matrox Millenium is one of the (if not _the_) fastest cards running in windows. Be sure to buy the non-OEM version though! /Martin

Buy OEM, do you mean the cheap one that doesn't come with a proper package and software(s)? What is wrong with it? Any information about the ET6000 Thanks JFD

On Tue, 30 Jul 1996 09:44:57 +0200, Jean-Francois De Rudder

Quoted text (9 lines)

>Hi everybody >I have a 133 with a Diamond stealth 64 2Mb VRAM. Altough the Stealth is >lightning fast in windows, I get a very low 177 in GP2 log. I have read >in different post that the Millenium and ET6000 are fast. Can anybody >advise me.... It looks like the Millenium might be difficult to find in >South-Africa, so maybe the ET6000. Is it decent running Windows too. >What is the meaning of the 177 in the log? If I get a 400 with another >card, by how much will the frame rate increase?

Hi, I have a 133 with a Matrox 4mb and it gives a slightly unbelievable video score of 487, maybe having a triton 430HX chipset helps as these are the faster than the more common 437VX sets. I'd be interested to hear any 133 owners with ET6000 cards video scores as this is what I am aiming for next. Also if you know of a UK dealer stocking these cards I'd like their number... The Matrox IS for sale in the UK incidentally, e-mail me if you want more info or check out uk.adverts.computer. - ....We are dreamers, shapers, singers and makers. We study the mysteries of laser and circuit, crystal and scanner. Holographic demons and invocations of equations. These are the tools we employ.... -

On Tue, 30 Jul 1996 15:39:22 +0200, Jean-Francois De Rudder

Quoted text (8 lines)

>> Matrox Millenium is one of the (if not _the_) fastest cards running in >> windows. Be sure to buy the non-OEM version though! >> /Martin >Buy OEM, do you mean the cheap one that doesn't come with a proper >package and software(s)? What is wrong with it? Any information about >the ET6000

For DOS games like GP2, there is no difference in performance between the OEM & retail versions (if you have proof to say otherwise, please post it & I'll shut up <g>). AFAIK, the only differences are: 1. You don't get the extra software 2. The RAMDAC has a lower maximum speed. This _only_ affects resolutions above 1024 * 768 (or maybe higher) 3. You can't add extra memory _and_ an MPEG (or other) daugtherboard Point 1 is immaterial to GP2 (unless they come up with an optimised version as with Nascar) Point 2 is only going to apply to Windows, etc. with large (17 inch plus) monitors. GP2 runs at 640 * 480 max. Point 3 also doesn't affect GP2 since it comes with a minimum of 2MB of WRAM (way, way more than required for GP2) and extra video memory won't speed things up. The Millenium is no better than most DOS cards for VGA. It is, however, one of the best for SVGA (but also check out the new Hercules cards) and for Windows. Richard

Quoted text (17 lines)

>On Tue, 30 Jul 1996 09:44:57 +0200, Jean-Francois De Rudder >>Hi everybody >>I have a 133 with a Diamond stealth 64 2Mb VRAM. Altough the Stealth is >>lightning fast in windows, I get a very low 177 in GP2 log. I have read >>in different post that the Millenium and ET6000 are fast. Can anybody >>advise me.... It looks like the Millenium might be difficult to find in >>South-Africa, so maybe the ET6000. Is it decent running Windows too. >>What is the meaning of the 177 in the log? If I get a 400 with another >>card, by how much will the frame rate increase? >Hi, >I have a 133 with a Matrox 4mb and it gives a slightly unbelievable >video score of 487, maybe having a triton 430HX chipset helps as these >are the faster than the more common 437VX sets.

Here are my results (Gateway-2000 P133-XL with OEM Matrox Millenium w/ 4MB WRAM, 32 MB EDO RAM) after booting to pure DOS 7.0 (out of Win95): Processor (x86): 5 Dos Version: 00000007h Running windows 95 or above Speed (c.f. DX2-66): 257 Searching for Vesa Card Found Vesa Version:00000200h Vesa Mode is available _____________________________________________________________________________ LaLa (Imre Olajos, Jr.) _/ean /\/\ichel _/arre and -=\/=- angelis fan WWW : http://homepage.interaccess.com/~lala | | ~~ []/\() ~~~~~~~~~~~ "Music should be free." /Vangelis/ ~~~~~~~~ /~~\ /~~\

I think that GP2 will be the same or close to the same doesn't matter what video card you have. You will see more performance if you have pipeburst cache, good/fast chipset (Like the Triton II, or the Intel 430HX), and processor (with decent floating point). You might see abit of performance with the Univbe drivers. But, don't count on it. Another thing, does anyone know if GP2 likes memory? Would you see better performance from upgrading to 24 Megs from 16? KLC.

Quoted text (7 lines)

>> It looks like the Millenium might be difficult to find in >>South-Africa, so maybe the ET6000. Is it decent running Windows too. >Matrox Millenium is one of the (if not _the_) fastest cards running in >windows. Be sure to buy the non-OEM version though! >/Martin

I was planning on getting the Hercules Dynamite 128 for my new PPro system but when their tech support told me that they will not be supporting 1152x852x16 mode in windows, I decided to go with the Millenium since my monitor (Sony 17se) deserves higher resolutions in windows. Depends on where you spend most of your time. The DOS and Windows speed of the Dynamite 128 are excellant though.

> I was planning on getting the Hercules Dynamite 128 for my new PPro > system but when their tech support told me that they will not be > supporting 1152x852x16 mode in windows, I decided to go with the > Millenium since my monitor (Sony 17se) deserves higher resolutions in > windows. Depends on where you spend most of your time. The DOS and > Windows speed of the Dynamite 128 are excellant though. I have a Pro and a Mellenium and suspect that you are gonna be real pleased with the resolutions and colors. Very nice indeed. JEB in Vegas

Quoted text (8 lines)

> Hi, > I have a 133 with a Matrox 4mb and it gives a slightly unbelievable > video score of 487, maybe having a triton 430HX chipset helps as these > are the faster than the more common 437VX sets. > I'd be interested to hear any 133 owners with ET6000 cards video > scores as this is what I am aiming for next. Also if you know of a UK > dealer stocking these cards I'd like their number...

I get a 460 reading from a Hercules 128 running with a Cyrix P166 on a supermicro P54cms mb.

I have read a lot about the Hercules Dynamite128 card, but here in Australia I have not seen one. Anyway what I was wondering was, how much does this card cost ? James Barnes Check Out The Australian Sport Page http://www.ozemail.com.au/~jaymz/aussport.html

I think that GP2 will be the same or close to the same doesn't matter what video card you have. You will see more performance if you have pipeburst cache, good/fast chipset (Like the Triton II, or the Intel 430HX), and processor (with decent floating point). You might see abit of performance with the Univbe drivers. But, don't count on it. Another thing, does anyone know if GP2 likes memory? Would you see better performance from upgrading to 24 Megs from 16? ---- Floating point unit is immaterial when it comes to gp2. Completely. --

I've said it once and I'll say it again - sorry Majin but this really is nonsense. If you try running ANY high end game such as ICR2 or any of the flight sims, you will see a BIG difference in performance. As for the ATI card, as you said - you haven't seen it. That makes the advice a bit suspect I would say. The ATI card _IS_ a good PCI card......in Windows. Try using it in DOS and it's a dog. The difference between graphics cards is relatively small compared to CPUs, a CPU will ALWAYS make more difference in power than a graphics card. A good graphics card can however make a difference of 5-10fps, which is a lot. Cheers! John _________________________________ __ _____| |_____ __ ________| |__| :| John Wallace | |__| |________ \ :| |::| :| Team WW Racing TSW | |::| | / > :| |::| :|_________________________________| |::| | < / :|__|::|____/ * Sim Racing News * \____|::|__| \ /______:/ \::/ http://sneezy.dcn.ed.ac.uk/simnews/index.htm \::/ \._____\ http://www.math.ohio-state.edu/~harmon/simnews

Quoted text (10 lines)

> I have read a lot about the Hercules Dynamite128 card, but here in > Australia I have not seen one. > Anyway what I was wondering was, how much does this card cost ? > James Barnes > Check Out > The Australian Sport Page > http://www.ozemail.com.au/~jaymz/aussport.html

I bought one for $379 here in Melbourne (but I have seen them for as much as $500). It gave me 1 fps less performance (yes less!!) than my S3 Trio 64 1mb card.

|> Again, the video card is not that important in DOS games. If somebody |> told you otherwise, forget it. Things are quite different if you want |> to run Windows for DirectX games though. This is contrary to what I have just experienced. I recently replaced my ATI Mach64 2MB VRAM with a Matrox MGA Millennium 2MB WRAM, and all my DOS games now ran smoother. In NFS, I could turn on more details while maintaining a smooth frame rate, where I couldn't possibly do with the ATI. In GP2, the estimated frame rate jumped ~3 fps. In the Windows department, I didn't notice a significant improvement though. -- My $0.02 (MSRP, plus shipping and handling, and applicable taxes. O.A.C., license, registration, PDI, freight, and insurance extra. Price subject to change without notice. Cash discounted, credit cards please add 3%)

Quoted text (28 lines)

>On Tue, 30 Jul 1996 09:44:57 +0200, Jean-Francois De Rudder >>Hi everybody >>I have a 133 with a Diamond stealth 64 2Mb VRAM. Altough the Stealth is >>lightning fast in windows, I get a very low 177 in GP2 log. I have read >>in different post that the Millenium and ET6000 are fast. Can anybody >>advise me.... It looks like the Millenium might be difficult to find in >>South-Africa, so maybe the ET6000. Is it decent running Windows too. >>What is the meaning of the 177 in the log? If I get a 400 with another >>card, by how much will the frame rate increase? >Hi, >I have a 133 with a Matrox 4mb and it gives a slightly unbelievable >video score of 487, maybe having a triton 430HX chipset helps as these >are the faster than the more common 437VX sets. >I'd be interested to hear any 133 owners with ET6000 cards video >scores as this is what I am aiming for next. Also if you know of a UK >dealer stocking these cards I'd like their number... >The Matrox IS for sale in the UK incidentally, e-mail me if you want >more info or check out uk.adverts.computer. >- >....We are dreamers, shapers, singers and makers. >We study the mysteries of laser and circuit, crystal and scanner. >Holographic demons and invocations of equations. >These are the tools we employ.... >-

Hi everybody, I have a P120 overclocked to 133, a motherboard with Intel TXC chipset, a Hercules Dynamite 128 and this are the results: Processor (x86): 5 Dos Version: 00000007h Running windows 95 or above Speed (c.f. DX2-66): 259 Video speed: 500 Bye Karsten Karsten Hoffmann, 23717 Griebel Schleswig Holstein, Germany

I too have a ati 64 with 2mb thought gp2 was low on fps = estimated17fps on the auto mode.i have a p133-16mb pipelineburst-triton. can you mail me for best hardware and info on how to get racing you lot. I think that i'm fast but don't have anybody to compare times with,been a f1gp fan for 3.5 yrs now please mail back.

Just went out and bought a Lightspeed 128 to replace the S3 trio 64+ on my p5-150. I have noticed some improvement in frame rate on GP2 and NASCAR but not 5fps. The log:on speed went from 170 something to 440 something, what that means in the real world I dont know. I payed $250 US for the card so I dont expect miracles and anybody that does is a fool. I am sure you will see some speed up with this card in DOS but I think 5fps maybe a little optimistic. If you have some tips to help speed things up I would love to hear them as I have only played with the card a little. Are there any utilities to help this? Thanks.

Hi Majin, This isn't meant to be a vendetta against you (!), I must say that as far as GP2 is concerned you are absolutely right. The way the program is written is highly restricting to faster video cards. OTOH, using faster video cards in NASCAR, ICR2 and especially ICR2'95 will show a BIG improvement, because those games are written is such a way that the better video card will be better. I currently have a Diamond Stealth 32, and a Herc Dynamite 128 which replaced my Hercules Stingray. I have benchmarked all three of those, and also tried my friend's Millenium - no difference in perceived frame rate on GP2, although video scores varied wildly. On ICR2 however, different story - the Dynamite and Millenium were streets ahead. Considering GP2 was used to market and sell the P-200, it's ironic that it takes little or no advantage of a better video card, despite detecting that it's better during start up. I have a feeling we must be missing something, but I'm damned if I can see what it is. Cheers! John _________________________________ __ _____| |_____ __ ________| |__| :| John Wallace | |__| |________ \ :| |::| :| Team WW Racing TSW | |::| | / > :| |::| :|_________________________________| |::| | < / :|__|::|____/ * Sim Racing News * \____|::|__| \ /______:/ \::/ http://sneezy.dcn.ed.ac.uk/simnews/index.htm \::/ \._____\ http://www.math.ohio-state.edu/~harmon/simnews

> Considering GP2 was used to market and sell the P-200, it's ironic that > it takes little or no advantage of a better video card, despite > detecting that it's better during start up. I have a feeling we must be > missing something, but I'm damned if I can see what it is. Hi John! It seems we are indeed missing something - modern, optimized video code that's written to take advantage of today's hardware. GP2 is a great sim - but it could be so much better on today's hardware instead of requiring PPro 200s to play with lots of detail. -- Colin Stuckless Memorial University of Newfoundland

Quoted text (9 lines)

> Just went out and bought a Lightspeed 128 to replace the S3 trio 64+ on my > p5-150. I have noticed some improvement in frame rate on GP2 and NASCAR but not > 5fps. The log:on speed went from 170 something to 440 something, what that > means in the real world I dont know. I payed $250 US for the card so I dont > expect miracles and anybody that does is a fool. I am sure you will see some > speed up with this card in DOS but I think 5fps maybe a little optimistic. If > you have some tips to help speed things up I would love to hear them as I have > only played with the card a little. Are there any utilities to help this? > Thanks.

What kind of performance were you getting from the S3? Not this logon crap, but what kind of framerate? Also, were you running S3SPDUP? We have similar systems, and I'm wondering how much of a hit I'm taking from my ATI Mach 64.

Quoted text (13 lines)

>> Just went out and bought a Lightspeed 128 to replace the S3 trio 64+ on my >> p5-150. I have noticed some improvement in frame rate on GP2 and NASCAR but not >> 5fps. The log:on speed went from 170 something to 440 something, what that >> means in the real world I dont know. I payed $250 US for the card so I dont >> expect miracles and anybody that does is a fool. I am sure you will see some >> speed up with this card in DOS but I think 5fps maybe a little optimistic. If >> you have some tips to help speed things up I would love to hear them as I have >> only played with the card a little. Are there any utilities to help this? >> Thanks. >What kind of performance were you getting from the S3? Not this logon >crap, but what kind of framerate? Also, were you running S3SPDUP? We >have similar systems, and I'm wondering how much of a hit I'm taking >from my ATI Mach 64.

The old S3 didnt do too bad. I was playing SVGA in GP2 with the track and sky textures off trackside details on high all objects in mirror but w/out texture and gettting a reccomended 17fps. These settings were fine every place but Monaco and the begginning of San Marino. I think that in alot of places I was getting more like 20-22 fps. I didnt see any speed increase with S3SPDUP or Univbe. I have heard that the ATI may be a dog but havent used one personally. If you have money laying around by a new card but dont expect much in GP2. Nascar, ICR2 , Longbow and Quake all gained more noticeably in the 2-3fps range (which still isnt much to your eyes) . I bought the card to get better color depth and higher refresh rates in Win95 as well as play games so I feel it was money well spent. If you do any video in Win95 you can have multiple video windows active with little degredation you can scale video and play AVI, DAT, MPG at full screen without dropping many frames. That would have killed the S3. I wouldnt reccomend anybody to buy a vid card solely to speed up DOS game performance you will be dissapointed but if you are looking to go to 3d cards when they come out you may want to get a good 2D card first and then use a pass through 3D such as the Orchid Righteous as most of the all in one boards look to be lacking in ther 2D chips.

Quoted text (17 lines)

> This isn't meant to be a vendetta against you (!), I must say that as > far as GP2 is concerned you are absolutely right. The way the program is > written is highly restricting to faster video cards. OTOH, using faster > video cards in NASCAR, ICR2 and especially ICR2'95 will show a BIG > improvement, because those games are written is such a way that the > better video card will be better. > I currently have a Diamond Stealth 32, and a Herc Dynamite 128 which > replaced my Hercules Stingray. I have benchmarked all three of those, > and also tried my friend's Millenium - no difference in perceived frame > rate on GP2, although video scores varied wildly. On ICR2 however, > different story - the Dynamite and Millenium were streets ahead. > Considering GP2 was used to market and sell the P-200, it's ironic that > it takes little or no advantage of a better video card, despite > detecting that it's better during start up. I have a feeling we must be > missing something, but I'm damned if I can see what it is.

I am wondering what is different about your Dynamite to mine. I just upgraded about 5 days ago from a Trident 9440 PCI gfx card to a Dynamite, and I get a 0% increase in GP2. The Trident scored 86 in the log:on, and the Hercules gets all of 381 (they are sending me a new BIOS so that may increase - or maybe I just need a new motherboard). My motherboard gets write speeds of 49.9 MB/s - is this bad? I want the fastest memory access I can get for my P166. what motherboards are best? I have ICR2 - and strangely enough - I get a 0% speed increase too. How are you getting a big speed up in this program???? Quake (the shareware demo version) runs about 5% faster though. So, as far as I can tell, gfx cards make *** all difference in DOS games. Windows, on the other hand... totally SCREAMS! :) In the polygon benchmark that comes with the card I get 150 million pixels/s at 1280x1024x8bit. Ideal for quick vector gfx games in windows. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- "One of these days I'm going to cut you into little pieces" Pink Floyd

Try Indycar 2 with the new card..... _________________________________ __ _____| |_____ __ ________| |__| :| John Wallace | |__| |________ \ :| |::| :| Team WW Racing TSW | |::| | / > :| |::| :|_________________________________| |::| | < / :|__|::|____/ * Sim Racing News * \____|::|__| \ /______:/ \::/ http://sneezy.dcn.ed.ac.uk/simnews/index.htm \._____\ [link lost in import: /~harmon/simnews]

: >I don't know John. I know that you write SRN and judging from the : >quality of it, you seemed to be a very trusty person :) : > : >But did you check the Quake frame rate page? As I said in my other : >posts, benchmark scores doesn't seemed to reflect the price of the : >video cards. I know there is some slow DOS performers like Diamond : >Edge but those are special cases. I still think that most PCI cards : >performs the same. Some posts from GP2 users (I've seen two) who : >actually bought Hercules over their old video card (non-ATI) confirms : >this. They got large increase in the video score from GP2LOG.TXT but : >no decrease in the CPU occupancy at the same graphic setting and the : >same set frame rate. : Hi Majin, : This isn't meant to be a vendetta against you (!), I must say that as : far as GP2 is concerned you are absolutely right. The way the program is : written is highly restricting to faster video cards. OTOH, using faster : video cards in NASCAR, ICR2 and especially ICR2'95 will show a BIG : improvement, because those games are written is such a way that the : better video card will be better. : I currently have a Diamond Stealth 32, and a Herc Dynamite 128 which : replaced my Hercules Stingray. I have benchmarked all three of those, : and also tried my friend's Millenium - no difference in perceived frame : rate on GP2, although video scores varied wildly. On ICR2 however, : different story - the Dynamite and Millenium were streets ahead. : Considering GP2 was used to market and sell the P-200, it's ironic that : it takes little or no advantage of a better video card, despite : detecting that it's better during start up. I have a feeling we must be : missing something, but I'm damned if I can see what it is. : Cheers! : John : _________________________________ : __ _____| |_____ __ : ________| |__| :| John Wallace | |__| |________ : \ :| |::| :| Team WW Racing TSW | |::| | / : > :| |::| :|_________________________________| |::| | < : / :|__|::|____/ * Sim Racing News * \____|::|__| \ : /______:/ \::/ http://sneezy.dcn.ed.ac.uk/simnews/index.htm \::/ \._____\ : http://www.math.ohio-state.edu/~harmon/simnews -- I have been getting some very contrasting opinions of the Diamond Edge 3d card from this group and from technical people I talk to at different computer stores. I have heard on this group that it is a very average card when performing 'normally' in DOS and Windows but has the new 3d technology built into it for future games. On the other hand all technical staff I talk to here in Melbourne say that it is very fast and the best card you can get ... one guy even told me it outperforms the Matrox! I am very confused about all these differing opinions, but at the moment I am tending to believe what I hear on this group, as some of the guys I have talked to seem to have some strange ideas about what is good hardware. Mark. Mark Farmer "Markk II" Graduate Diploma in Computer Science - Latrobe University

There is NO great improvement in using the different drivers modes, supported by different cards and drivers, the only thing you'll get is more pages, resolution and colors. NO SPEED.... I don't believe that ICR2 or NASCAR or any other game is faster than GP2. THE ONLY DIFFERENCE is the programmers ability to cut edges, remove code ect. to gain speed. NO ACCELARATION..... Look at USNF. The game supports the latest VESA drivers ect. and a LOT of screen modes. But is it any faster ? NO.... The only way you can remove the bottleneck in SVGA graphics, is whan using accelerated functions. Try NASCAR on a Matrox card.. 25 frames on a P100 with ALL detail on... LB

Quoted text (24 lines)

> >> I have read a lot about the Hercules Dynamite128 card, but here in > >> Australia I have not seen one. > >> Anyway what I was wondering was, how much does this card cost ? > >> James Barnes > >> Check Out > >> The Australian Sport Page > >> http://www.ozemail.com.au/~jaymz/aussport.html > >I bought one for $379 here in Melbourne (but I have seen them for as much > >as $500). It gave me 1 fps less performance (yes less!!) than my S3 Trio > >64 1mb card. > Again, the video card is not that important in DOS games. If somebody > told you otherwise, forget it. Things are quite different if you want > to run Windows for DirectX games though. > Now I see John and some other people reporting ATI is slow in DOS. I > don't know because I haven't seen it. But most PCI cards should have > no problem. > --KCI

Wrong!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 If the video card makes no difference in Dos then how come I can double my frame rate in Duke Nukem by just changing Video cards. What you have to realize is that GP2 may not gain much from a faster card but that is not to say other dos games don't. Try NFS with a slow card vs a fast and see the difference. The bottleneck in GP2 happens at the main proccesor, whereas duke nukem and other dos games hit a bottleneck with the video cards ability to update the screen. IMHO Mac

SNIP!

Quoted text (11 lines)

> I am very confused about all these differing opinions, but at the moment > I am tending to believe what I hear on this group, as some of the guys I > have talked to seem to have some strange ideas about what is good > hardware. > Mark. > Mark Farmer > "Markk II" > Graduate Diploma in Computer Science - Latrobe University

Well, I broke down and replaced my Imagine 128 with a Millenium, and got about 10fps improvement in GP2 in SVGA. The Imagine 128 is known to be quite appallingly slow in DOS (my log:on score was _28_, and I've seen lower), however, so this is not much of a surprise. The machine is a P100, 96mb ram (non EDO), 256k (non-PB) cache. I noticed that the log:on video speed for many Millenium owners was over 400, but mine only hits about 190. Many of the other posters had P133-P166 machines - does that account for the massive difference in the video speed scores? Still happy with the purchase, in any case, as I took no performance hit in Windows and greatly improved DOS performance. Rick