Best PCI video card for old dual Pentium II 400

[bshiro]

Hi,

I was hoping someone out there would have some insight into an issue I'm facing now. I have an old dual Pentium Pro computer that I've upgraded over the years with dual Pentium II Overdrive processors (333 MHz running at 400 MHz) and 512 MB RAM (EDO ECC buffered). It's been a faithful computer for all Windows NT varieties including Windows 2000, which it's running just fine now. I've had Linux on it in the past and want to switch back to Linux on this computer to extend its life longer. Before doing so, I want to put the best video card that I can in it to relieve as much processing from the motherboard as possible. That's why I've been looking at the GPU-based GeForce and Radeon varieties.

So far, I've tried a GeForce4 (w/ 64mb SDRAM) with no luck. The computer just hung. I'm pretty sure that GeForce2 MX 200/400 and Radeon 7000/VE cards will work fine. I'm also wondering about the Radeon 7500 since it seems a lot better than these two. I also saw a PCI Radeon 9200SE with 128MB DDR memory on eBay, but I'm afraid it probably won't work with my motherboard (anyone know otherwise?).

What I've been thinking so far is to get a card with the most memory possible, which for my setup seems to be 64 MB DDR. Can anyone speak to the pro's and con's of the GeForce2 MX 200/400 vs the Radeon 7000/7500? Even better, what would work best in my old PPro->PII system? I know the computer is old, but it runs great and has a lot of life left in it, epecially in Linux (I do not do any gaming). Whatever video card I settle on, I'll probably get it off eBay b/c I don't want to spend more than $30.

Thanks,
Brian

PS: Any suggestions for the best Linux disto to try? I've put RedHat and SuSE on it in the past and was thinking about SUSE 9.1 Professional but am worried about sluggishness. Should I consider Vector Linux, Xandros, or another more "lite" version?

Micron Millenia Pro2
Micronics W6-LI MB (82440FX chipset, PCI 2.1, no AGP, no USB)
dual Pentium II Overdrive processors (400MHz, 512KB cache)
512 MB EDO ECC RAM (buffered)
Number Nine Image 128 Series 2 w/ 4mb VRAM (want to upgrade this)
Soundblaster AWE32
2x10GB+3GB hard drives
52x24x52 CDRW
3COM 10/100 Ethernet controller

 

[peacemaker1ps]

I have another computer that doesn't support AGP and has GEforce2 mx400.
Runs fine for what it needs.
Havn't had single problem whatsoever.
It's only 433mhz and i don't use it frequently.

 

[Brackus2]

I guess if you wanna spend a bit more (most these cards should be pretty cheap if you look around) go for 64 mb ram for sure, I would say anything geforce2 and up as alot of games were built specifically for their technology as a base.

The Radeon 7500, 8500 are both awesome, I have always wanted a computer with one of their all in wonders so maybe if your looking this low that might makea nice card,

If not geforce3 or 4 ati9000 and up all 128mb if you really wanna just dump your money around, maybe have an okay card in the future,

Depends if you wanna spend 20, 40 or 80 bucks basically...

 

[bshiro]

Thanks for the thoughts so far. I guess I should clarify that the main thing constricting me here is not really the money but the motherboard. Since I know it can't handle a GeForce4, I know there is a definite ceiling of graphic card quality that will be compatible. I'm thinking it's around the GeForce2 or Radeon 7500 level, but I'd love it if something better would work. At this point, I am leaning to the GeForce cards because NVIDIA makes its Linux drivers open source, unlike ATI, which doesn't officially even have drivers for cards < 8000 (although plenty of 3rd party ones exist). On the other hand, both should work...

 

[bshiro]

Thanks for the suggestions. I picked up a GeForce2 card cheap on ebay, and the computer won't boot with it installed. Now I know that GeForce 2 and 4 are not compatible with at least this motherboard (not sure about other PPro boards). I was hoping for a Nvidia solution since their Linux drivers are great. However, I think I'll try the Radeon since they now work on Linux too, and several people have noted that their 2D is better than Nvidia anyway. I think I'll go with the lowest version I can find - like the 7000 (aka VE) because I think compatibility might still be an issue.

Thanks,
Brian

 

[Marsumane]

I have no idea what your motherboard supports. I suggest updating the bios drivers. Possibly this will correct your errors. Also, maybe your motherboard only supports agp 1x. This is just a guess, and maybe you can find a perticular card that supports agp 1x contrary to the possibility that your card may be only 2x and above.

I have a p2 400mhz system with a 64mb geforce 3 ti200. This comptuer can play wc3 at 28fps avg. It is severely bottlenecked by processor. I suggest anything below this card, and nothing above due to your processor always bottlenecking the graphics card.

 

[bshiro]

The bios is updated as much as it can be. My motherboard does not have AGP at all - only PCI and I SA. That's the whole issue really - what is the best PCI card that will still work for me... Apparetnly, Nvidia cards won't work (sigh).

 

[Whizzer]

YHPM

 

[VirtualLarry]

A 440FX-based system? My word man, time to upgrade. That was a dual-PPro Socket8 system back in it's day, wasn't it? I'm not sure exactly why you need to upgrade your video card, everything else seems to be of similar vintage, and a system that old won't play any modern games, even with a faster video card.

Before doing so, I want to put the best video card that I can in it to relieve as much processing from the motherboard as possible. That's why I've been looking at the GPU-based GeForce and Radeon varieties.

Part of the problem is, a faster video card, at least for gaming, also puts a higher demand on the CPU processing power too, and most games sadly do not benefit from SMP setups. They much prefer more-powerful single CPUs. So effectively, you have a slow 400Mhz machine, with EDO RAM. Not exactly a modern game-worthy machine.

I would relegate it to server-duty somewhere, and spend the money on a new Athlon box, if money is indeed not a pressing issue. The video card installed, wouldn't matter, if it were running as a server.

 

[bshiro]

I don't care about gaming, so that's not an issue. All I want to do is take as much load off the motherboard as possible, and having more video memory should help that. The computer *is* used as a workstation/server (see my original post).

You mentioned that gaming with a better video card also increases CPU usage compared to gaming on the same system with a worse video card. I don't buy that. You'll have to convince me. Anyway, since my use is mostly in viewing postscript files, using Photoshop/Illustrator, and office apps, does your comment still hold?

 

[mikeford]

Maybe I have this wrong but doesn't the video card require the use of as much mainboard memory as it has of video memory on the card?

Also I think almost all the video memory issues are related to 3D, and don't do diddly for 2D applications.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: bshiro
I don't care about gaming, so that's not an issue. All I want to do is take as much load off the motherboard as possible, and having more video memory should help that. The computer *is* used as a workstation/server (see my original post).

You mentioned that gaming with a better video card also increases CPU usage compared to gaming on the same system with a worse video card. I don't buy that. You'll have to convince me. Anyway, since my use is mostly in viewing postscript files, using Photoshop/Illustrator, and office apps, does your comment still hold?

The only thing that more video memory would buy you in those cases, would be more/larger offscreen buffers (possibly for compositing 2D work), and more bitmap- and font-caching, which actually could be a bit of a win, as it would mean that the host CPU wouldn't have to re-rasterize fonts quite as often, if they were able to stay in the cache. I don't really think that it would help Photoshop much, I think that it does most of its work (effects) in system RAM using the main CPU(s). Perhaps someone that uses Photoshop heavily would care to chime in here.

If you want a cheap but lots-o-vram video card, investigate a Radeon 9200 or 9550 card, preferably with a 128-bit memory bus, with 256MB of RAM. That much RAM is utterly useless and overkill for such a slow card for 3D gaming, but for 2D work, it would offer an awful lot of 2D bitmap/font caching space. (Heck, you could almost use it for a paging file/ramdisk even.)

Shouldn't cost you more than $100. But for that same price, you could get an Athlon XP motherboard, with an NF2 chipset and integrated GF4 MX-level video, and a CPU! Add another $100 or so for RAM, and you would have a system that is overall much higher-performance for what you are trying to use it for. That's why I suggested you relegate the current system to fileserver duties and build yourself a new workstation.

While a $100 video card could provide some additional theoretical benefit (5% at most, probably), I don't think that it would be nearly as noticable an increase as a full mobo/CPU upgrade would be.

 

[Delorian]

Have you tried looking into some older matrox solutions? Their 2D IQ is nearly unbeatable.

Maybe an ATI Rage XL like this one at newegg, it's only 31 bucks and apparently people are putting them in their servers