• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Best 3d now! optimised video card for k6-III 450?

D

Deanodarlo

Senior member
Got a matrox G200, but because of its triangle set up it dosn't get any faster after anything more powerful than a pentium 266 is inserted.

Due to the k6-III 450 being a bit soft in the fpu department (550 MFLOPS), ideally I need a card that has great 3dnow! drivers, is not cpu limited like the matrox (that's REALLY annoying!), and perhaps a touch of dvd hardware assist would be nice but not essential.

My AGP port is 1x speed only, so these modern cards would be a waste.

Any one out there got any suggestions?

Thanks for your time, Deano
 
This is an easy choice.
Due to CPU, most of your gaming will be 16bit.
GeForce2 MX beats most other non-nVidia cards in 16 bit and trounces the Radeon in 16bit.

Some newer games require 32bit 3d, (such as Microsoft's Links 2001), so it is good to have if needed. This rules out a Voodoo3 type card. 3dfx is no more, but even if they were, you can get a GeForce2 for the same price as a Voodoo4, and get a much faster card in the process.

nVidia's drivers are well aged and polished with some of the best 3DNow! support. No issues there. ATI can be forced to work with some Socket 7 boards, 3dfx AGP can cause problems with many socket 7 boards, while GF2 MX exhibits none of these issues.

I just went though these same choices for a SS7 system.
Get an ATI Radeon LE OEM delivered for $83?
Get a nVidia Gigabyte GF2 MX w/TV out Retail for $94 delivered?
newegg.com video cards
After checking out the K6-X boards and forums, it was an easy choice. GF2 MX.

 
Actually color depth and CPU limitation has nothing to do with each other.
A GF2 Ultra would display 32 bit just as fast as 16 bit on such a low end CPU in most cases.

But if I were you I'd get a Voodoo3, anything more would be a waste with that CPU, and the V3's work very well with the SS7 platform, and do have very good 3DNow! optimizations.
 
Hum, results at Madonion seem to show the same trend with low end CPU's Vs high end CPU's. ATI doesn't take much of a performance hit when switching from 16bit to 32 bit, while the GF2 MX does take a hit.

ATI Radeon
1024x768x16 = 1900 avg.
1024x768x32 = 1700 avg.

GeForce2 MX
1024x768x16 = 3200 avg.
1024x768x32 = 2200 avg.

For comparison, 3dfx v3 3000
1024x768x16 = 1800 avg.
1024x768x32 = N/A.

3 reasons NOT to get a V3:
1. The V3 has been known to have issues with many SS7 boards AGP Voltage. (3dfx FAQ)
2. Only supports 16bit 3d, and some games now require 32bit, (which means more soon will).
3. 3dfx is gone. Driver support is gone. Game makers support is gone. (actually that happened before 3dfx anounced they were closing up shop, as Microsoft proved by releasing a non 16bit 3d product).
 
1. And do you think GeForce's, Radeon etc have less problems? Every "true" AGP card out there has had heaps of problems with lots of SS7 mobos.

2. Its not like he's going to be playing any new games with that K6-2 anyway 🙂

3. Doesnt matter a whole lot with such an old system, he's not gonna want to run Whistler and Doom3 on that rig either way.
 
1. Not any more. GF2 MX is a low voltage solution with no problems with SS7. ATI = trouble.
2. New games run just fine with a K6-X system.
Running a K6-III 448 and V3 3k here.
UT works great (not new). NFSPU works great. Midtown Madness works great. Links 2001 works badly, as I must run if in software mode due too 16 bit V3 limitation, not K6 limitation. Have yet to find a new game that didn't work great yet, although I'm sure there are many.
3. I agree the K6 is maxed out with Win9x, but not with gaming yet.

Needless to say, the best place to look up the answer to this question is not here, but instead in a forum devoted to K6-X CPU's. K6 forum. I've been to that forum, I have the hardware, and I've got the results. GF2 MX.

 
Well, great is definately a matter of definition, have a K6-3 400@450 at home, and it runs most last gen and some current gen games decently, Quake3 and CS are played pretty often on it and work fine, but not good.

As for AGP problems, many problems weren't related to AGP voltage but to poor AGP limitations in the SS7 chipsets, causing cards like the TNT's to have lots of problems, while the V3's, being pretty much PCI cards with an AGP interface, worked fine.

However, one good way to get the best deal could be to simply buy a card, be it MX, Radeon or whatever, try it, and if it doesnt work, return it and try another.

Oh and BTW, another reason to get the V3 over any nVidia card is that he's upgrading from a G200, hence, 2D quality might be a concern.
 
Sorry, but I must disagree with the V3 AGP issue. 3dfx stated on there own site that the V3 would not work with many GigaByte, Asus, and FIC motherboards. I am using the V3 with a newer FIC 503+, and it's fine, but many SS7 boards are NOT fine with the V3. The V3 is one of the most power hungry early AGP cards, and that is why it has problems. If a V3 works, than any card will work. The same can't be said the other way. (I.E. TNT works so V3 will work). Even the newer breed of cards like GF2 and ATI use MUCH less power than the V3 does.

As for 2D, that is a non-issue. My V3 went into wifes machine when I upgraded to a GF2 GTS.
2d quality is just as good, if not better, on the GF2 card. I see both screens constantly, so this is another thing I take from personal experience. The 2d issue seems to mainly be brought up by ATI Radeon owners that say there 2d is better than nVidia's at resolutions like 1600x1200x32 when used "with" Sony based CRT's.. In this case we are talking K6, which normally means 1024x768, even "if" he had a Trinitron tube.
 
Thanks everyone, your discussion has been very useful.

Probably get the V3 because it's going for around £30 in UK auction sites and that's all I really need to spend on this older system. All I want to do is make the best possible use of this cpu at minimum cost.

Still see there are differences in opinions about its compatibility. Have a TMC TI5VGF m/b so I'll look into any issues before finally deciding.

Just out of interest, with the G200 at 16 bit 640X480 resolution and max detail settings, I get about 24 FPS (don't laugh - it's still playable) in Quake III.

What sort of improvement am I looking at with other cards and the k6-III 450?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top