was just given a 9800 pro , I decided to put into an old
machine ( 1.1 t/bird , MSI m/board W/ Kt133a ,512mb pc133 )
wont boot after drivers loaded ,gets to windows XP pro
start screen then restarts , then comes up with options to start in safe mode etc
when I installed card also installed new Fortron 400w
fresh format / install win XP pro
made sure video card power cord was connected
installed Via 4 in 1s
installed SP1 & updates
relaxed all memory timings
updated to latest BIOS
now I'm Stuck
all works well w/old GF 3 Ti200
did fresh formats and re-installs in between
so no driver conflicts
Not sure if this will help any, but I have an Nvidia card and removed all the drivers, cleaned it all out. I install an ATI 9600 and there was problems similar to what you have.
It turned out that Nvidia doesnt actually remove everything it says it does. There was some crap in the regedit (did a search for nvidia) and deleted it. Install the ATI card and everything worked fine.
you always get a display , even if no drivers are loaded for video card ,( my nForce 2 board requires SP1 installed before loading chipset drivers for USB 2.0 )
as soon as driver installation is done , it tells you to restart , upon restarting is when the problem arises
it wont boot at all, unless you select " last known good
configuration " or safe mode , if you select safe mode it re-starts but says "system has recovered from a serios error " cause 9800 pro driver
if I select last good config. it resarts but the 9800 driver is not loaded
I tried to load drivers both from 1st boot after Format/re-install
tried different catalyst versions
keep in mind between each attempt I format & re-install
Since last post , tried different P/S Antec true 430
put card in A7N8X , barton 2500 , 1g Corsiar
did fresh install
No Problems at all !!!
is the KT133a chipset maybe not capable ?
It sounds again like this may be a psu issue. all the problems with radeons seem to involve system restarts. get a branded enermax 450 watt psu and this will eliminate power issues and will be a sound investment.
Donnie I'm not gonna flame you. The only reason I'm not gonna flame you is because I think most of the people reading your sh*t are smart enough to recognize it as B.S. However, if I felt you were giving bad advice or spreading B.S. that was taken seriously, I would surely flame you.
Ever wonder why the REASON most of the 'problem' threads on this board are about ATI cards? BECAUSE MOST PEOPLE HERE HAVE THEM THATS WHY! I'd say that it is generally accepted by 75%-80% of people with knowledge on the subject, that of the current generation of cards, the 9800 (XT being the best) is the best card HANDS DOWN, in almost every aspect.
Stop the B.S. or I'll break up a 5950 PCB and shove the pieces up your ass.
Me: are you saying I can't provide?
Me: cause I know I can provide.
Me: oh and I can provide money too;)
Rachel : why do we need money when we can just stay in our room and have sex all day?
Athlon XP 2800+, ASUS A7N8X-X
512mb PC2700 DDR <font color=red>(6-2-2-2)</font color=red>
128mb ATI Radeon 9800 Pro <font color=red>(439/374)</font color=red>
WD 80GB SE 7,200rpm
3D Mark03 Score <font color=red>6,316</font color=red>
I never gave advice on anything. I stated what i plan on going with. And the reason I would rather go with a 5950 is because i'm a big doom fan and i plan on getting doom3. Benchmarks already done have proven the 5950 to be running doom3 at between 50-70% better than the 9800. I'm not saying that ati can't release a new driver that will run it better, I just would rather have a card that i will know run the games i want good. I never bashed the 9800, I think it's a good card. Plenty of my friends have it and after figuring out there problems it runs good. And I think you need to be more mature when it comes to peoples posts and read it fully before you come back all fired up. I only stat my point of view i never suggested a nvidia card over a ati card.
That really doesn't prove anything.
Those are old benchmarks (ATI is on 4.3 cats currently and a lot has changed since 3.2)
Both use 32bit color depth but he was talking precision. ATI uses 24bit while Nvidia uses 12/FP16/32.
I'd really look into benchmarks/pics again when D3 comes out. I've heard even though D3 is openGL, ID has had to do some special things for the FX series and I believe it's because of Nvidia's lack of shader power.
Let me tell ya, it's not because ATI is SOO great (they are very good though) but because the FX series was poor. Only now are the most stuborn seeing that with DX9 games. PS1.1 vs ps2.0 with similar FPS. Big difference in game experience at the same price points.<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Piccoro on 04/04/04 11:36 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
Supposedly there will be 4 code paths in D]|[ and the FX's will be running their own code path which helps them with their performance, and likely at little IQ loss if any. The shadows should be an interesting comparison thanks to some of nV's features and Ogl extensions. I'd also love to see the R9700 vs R9800 with their added f-buffer and nV's UltraShadow. Hype or useful?
Carmack said that the FX should be a little bit faster running D]|[ thanks to it's own codepath, but running the standard ARB path that will be run by the Radeons the FX will be significantly slower.
But at this point it's almost all academic, since by the time D]|[ is out there will be new hardware (hopefully) that should rewrite the baseline for each company. New buyers won't care how the FX5800U performs against the R9700Pro, they'll be focused on the NV40 vs R42X of course. And I would be very surprised if the NV40 has any of the problems of the NV3X series.
I just hope the NeoMagic256 will handle it without droping too many frames. It played the video pretty good.
- You need a licence to buy a gun, but they'll sell anyone a stamp <i>(or internet account)</i> ! - <font color=green>RED </font color=green> <font color=red> GREEN</font color=red> GA to SK