Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Kyro II

Tags:
  • Graphics Cards
  • Computer
  • Graphics
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
January 14, 2002 10:49:07 AM

I'm building a new computer, and I'm going to take my graphics card, Harddrive, CD and CDRW drives, and floppy from my current comp, and replace them with parts from an older computer (a pentium 233 actually) but I want to get a good, low-cost video card, which brings me to the Kyro II. I've heard alot about it and most seems good, especially for the price, but what brand is the best? Hercules, Innovision, or Apollo? Innovision seems more closely related to the Kyro II, or maybe a Radeon 7500 which I found on Pricewatch for around $90(OEM), so any help is appreciated...

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Jehdin on 01/15/02 10:21 AM.</EM></FONT></P>

More about : kyro

Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
January 15, 2002 1:34:16 AM

Given the three main sub $100 videocards (Geforce2, Radeon 7500 and KyroII), I'd have to side with the Radeon. But that is all dependant on what about $30 means to you.

On a side note, is Visiontek paying pricewatch off to get it's video cards under a seperate listing?
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
January 15, 2002 3:19:36 AM

My wife has a Hercules Prophet 4500 in her machine and while it performs well enough for just about every game we sneak on it for Lan Gaming it has trouble with Comanche 4 and some FPS we play. My 15 yr. old son has a RADEON 64 MB DDR in his machine and it is far better than the KYRO II card in every way ( visuals and performance ) and it isn't as powerful as the RADEON 7500 you mentioned, so the 7500 is a much better choose out of them. Now my 17 yr. old boy has a Visiontek GeForce 2 Ti 64 MB in his machine and it can out perform both the RADEON and the Hercules and Comanche 4, Ghost Recon, CounterStrike and IL-2 along with most every other game we play on our LAN here look AWESOME. While I can't say for sure first hand that the GF2-Ti based card will out perform the RADEON 7500 you mentioned, it's just an overclocked RADEON 64 MB DDR and the Visiontek GF2-Ti really makes games look great and run far smoother at 1024x768x32 than my boys RADEON. A Gainward GeForce 2 Ti 450 with 64 MB of DDR is a slightly faster clocked GF2-Ti and costs $129.99 retail at Comp USA so on-line you might find one for your $100.00 price limit.
By the way, the RADEON was in my machine till Santa brought me my Visiontek 6564 GF3-Ti-200, now this card ROCKs. Comanche 4, Ghost Recon and Max Payne @ 1280x1024x32 AWESOME, Quake 3, Q3 Arena, Swat 3*, Rainbow Six Black Thorn*, Soldier of Fortune, Unreal T. all run smooth as silk @ 1600x1200 with all features Maxed out and the ones with the * symbol can even do it with FSAA enabled. The reason I mentioned my card is Santa got it on sale at BestBuy for $149.99 with a $50.00 mail-in rebate, final cost $99.99. It happened Once, it could again.
In short, if you can find the ATI RADEON 7500 for less than a GeForce 2 Ti card then go for it if your an ATI fan and if you think ATI will ever make SmoothVision a part of the 7500 driver options it would truely be a Better card. I myself being a long time ATI card owner I wouldn't count on them keeping ant promises anytime soon. Go for the Gainward card. :wink:

Take it with you, be a MobileGamer :wink:
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
January 15, 2002 3:59:53 AM

Thanks for the info, found the Gainward Geforce 2 TI for $99 with shipping at Newegg.com. Probably going to get it.
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
January 15, 2002 9:28:04 AM

The trouble with most comments on the relative merit of the Kyro II is that people don't generally include details of what processor they have. The Kyro II scales very well with a processor. So if you have something like an Athlon 700, the Kyro II should be slightly better than an MX, with 1Ghz, it should be on a par with a GTS and with a 1.4Ghz the Kyro II should outperform the GTS, running at 1024x768 and 32bit anyway. The Kyro II also gives better looking graphics than the GeForce cards, but not as good as Radeons.

So the trouble with what mobilegamer said about his Hercules is difficult to know since he doesn't say what processor is in his wifes computer, I suspect that since it is his wifes and not his, that it is not the latest fastest processor around!

As for you, if you are really only using a PII 233, then definatley DON'T get a KyroII, you will not get great performance out of it with that processor. If you are going to use a faster processor in the near future, or anyone else who is reading this who does, then have a look at Videologic Vivid!XS cards, they are much cheaper than Hercules and come with TV-Out as standard. Certainly this is the case in the UK. Looking around, unless you want to play games at 1600x1200, having 64mb is not really worth the extra money. because of the Tile Based Rendering, it does not require quite so much memory bandwidth of other cards.

I currently have a duron 800 (and will upgrade to an Athlon 1.4, when they become bargain basement, as I can't use the new Morgan core in my m/b) and plan to get a Kyro card in the next few months, I will get the Videologic Vivid!XS 32mb at a cost of 80 UK pounds unless the new Kyro III is priced well and performs well.

HTH

Topher Bear

Don't wait for tomorrow! Live for Today! :-)
January 15, 2002 9:40:18 AM

Ok let me explain my situation more thoroughly....

I have 3 comps, all are Gateways, the oldest is a Pentium(2?)233 with an ATI Rage II, next is the pentium 3 550 with a voodoo 3 3000, then is the one im using now, an Athlon 1100 with a Geforce 2 Ultra. Im getting an Athlon XP 1800+, Nforce 415-D motherboard(once its released), Antec SX840 case with 400W powersupply and 2 fans, and 2 sticks of Crucial 256MB DDR2100, going to use the onboard sound, and im taking the Graphics card, harddrive, CD and CDRW drives, and Floppy from my Athlon 1100 computer, and replacing that with older parts from the old 233(the hardrives, CD-ROM drive, and Floppy drive), and I need a new graphics card for the Athlon 1100 comp, cause it will be used for gaming (my brother will be using it), and my mother will stick with the P3 550 she has, sound complicated to you? heh

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Jehdin on 01/15/02 06:48 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
January 15, 2002 10:01:28 AM

Err! Well I think I've got it! :-)

So you need a graophics card to go in an Athlon 1100 PC using old Pentium 233 hard drive/CD-Rom etc. hmm!
No, in that case I would say that a Kyro II is definately worth considering, as you will get great performance, at a generally lower price than its comparisons. The one major drawback to the KyroII though, is the lack of TnL, which i believe is becoming to come in to moden games...I'm not really very wll up on this aspect, maybe someone else can advise how important TnL is going to be.

If you were to go the Kyro II route, then Hercules wouldn't be my first choice, unless you want to go the OEM route, since their retail packages are much more expensive with no real additional beneifts. In the UK i know that their are only really 2 boards avaiable for Kyro II (the Hercules and the Videologic) but elsewhere there are some other minor manufacturers using them, I don't really know what they are like. What I am trying to say, is that it is possible to pick up a KyroII incredably cheaply, but provide GTS level performance with your processor.

You may have guessed by now, that I am a fan! (but then I have always gone for the 6 months out of date stuff playing the 1 year old and older games :-)

Good luck with your rebuild and hope you have fun!

Topher Bear

Don't wait for tomorrow! Live for Today! :-)
January 15, 2002 12:59:33 PM

Ok, I have found a Retail Gainward Geforce 2 Ti for $99 with shipping, an OEM Radeon 7500 for $101 with shipping, and an OEM Hercules Kyro II 4500 for $83 with shipping (no tv out, which I won't use anyway..) So for $16-$18 more I get a T&L capable card, is Kyro II really that good? If so I'd really like to know as that would interest me :) 

BTW I don't mean to sound like I'm disregarding any of your posts, they are extremely helpful, I'm just stating that I found a couple of other good cards at around the same price as the Kyro II, and was wondering if the Kyro II is still a better choice, thanks for the help.<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Jehdin on 01/15/02 10:13 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
January 15, 2002 1:52:40 PM

Its really hard to tell. I've tried to find a review somewhere that pitches the Kyro II against the Radeon 7500 and GeForce 2 Ti, with a processor around the 1Ghz mark. it would seem that reviewers are done with the Kyro II and the 7500 and Ti cards are tested with 1.7Ghz plus!

but...what I have gleaned is that (according to Toms reviews) the GeForce 2Ti is about 5 - 10% faster than the Radeon 7500, but this could easily change around with drivers, and that the Kyro II at around the 1.1Ghz mark is equivalent in speed to the GTS/Pro (some have it faster and some have it slower), and the GeForce 2 Ti is probably only about 5% faster than the GTS/Pro (maybe someone will have more expereince and can correct me if I am wrong here!)

These are based on high settings at 1024x768 at 32 bit (which I would reckon is a good basis for the average gamer) If you tend to play at lower res, then the Kyro will not have any advantage, but increase it and it may do better still!)

So I would say that all these cards are about equal in your system, and that since the KyroII is the cheapest, will give you the most bang for your buck.
I would say the question you need to ask yourself is, is TnL (and definately no compatbility probkems - although there aren't any with Kyro on major games) worth $17. The answer to that is, I have no idea!! All I will say is that they have been banging on about TnL for ages, but I'm yet to see it really hit the games properly!

regards

Topher Bear

Don't wait for tomorrow! Live for Today! :-)
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
January 16, 2002 2:09:43 AM

I'm not sure what reviews you are talking about, but the latest benchmarks tom has given are here: http://www4.tomshardware.com/graphic/01q4/011218/geforc...

The Radeon and GF2Ti are about on par with each other, I just think that the Radeon is a better card. You aren't going to go wrong with a GF2Ti, in fact that is what I have (it's even the Gainward).
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
January 17, 2002 7:29:29 AM

Wifes Machine( Hercules card )
P-III 866/133fsb, 512 MB PC133, ASUS mb 815EP chipset
Son 14( RADEON )
Celeron 850/100fsb, 512 MB PC133, Abit mb BX chipset
Son 17( GF2-Ti )
P-III 750/100fsb, 512 MB PC133, Abit mb BX chipset
Dads( GF3-Ti-200 )
P-III 933/133fsb, 512 MB PC133, ASUS mb 815EP chipset
Spare( G-400 )
Celeron 600 o/c 809, 256 MB PC100, Abit mb BX chipset

Take it with you, be a MobileGamer :wink:
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
January 17, 2002 8:04:29 AM

Go with a card that supports T/L in Hardware. All the games coming out and in developement will be using it. Look at screen shots of Comanche 4 with T/L and some without. You'll see grass that moves with it and you'll see just colored ground without.
Both the RADEON 7500 and the GF2-Ti are well equipt to support Hardware Texture and Lighting so I think they would have a longer life span.
The KYRO II does look nice in many games and runs many games well, and as everyone is saying scales well with CPU speed, but I feel the lack of Hardware supported T/L is it's short coming.
I can see a visual differance between the KYRO II and both the RADEON and GF2-Ti when playing every DirectX game and the KYRO II just isn't as pleasing to my eye. Playing SOF in Open-GL the Differance it null. But as I said Comanche 4 uses Texture and Lighting as part of it's game engine which displays very cool effects like blowing grass and sea spray from rotors. The game looks so much better on the GF2-Ti and RADEON, so I can only beleive that future game releases will also look better with cards supporting Hardware T/L.
KYRO III will support Hardware T/L and many DX8 feature but the chips have only just had 2 test waffers( just under 100 chips) pressed so it will still be a while coming. Matrox has also gone into chip testing of it's new gaming GPU which should also support many if not all of DX8.1 and it's T/L in hardware is said to surpass GF3 levels. Rumors of a RADEON 8500 MAX or Plus are false, they might move the Core to 300 in an AGP PRO version, and nVidia and GF4 will be ready before any of the others.

Take it with you, be a MobileGamer :wink:
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
January 17, 2002 9:24:56 AM

Hey, Mobile, where'd you get that info on the Kyro III?

I've been reading several Kyro websites and forums, eager to find out when the Kyro III is coming out, but I haven't seen anything like you've said. i'd like to know the source so I can keep an eye on it.

There is runour of a Hercules 4800 (Kyro II Ultra) with higher clocked core and memory (200/200) coming out in the next couple of weeks (well late I know ....) which has fueled speculation that they may release a Kyro III at the same time, a la Nvidia with GeForce 2Ti and GeForce 3Ti, and ATI Radeon 7500 and 8500. But if your news is true and up to date then, that blows that one out the water and I may well go for the II Ultra now!

Thanks for the info on TnL, but this card is onbly really designed as a budget replacement of my TNT1, to last a couplf of years playing out of date games!! :-)



Topher Bear

All advice I offer is free! What is the value of free advice?
!