Chrome9 HC IGP vs Geforce 3 128MB

[Gorrillasnot]

A friend has a PC with an Athlon XP 1700+, 512MB RAM, and a Geforce 3 128MB vid card that he plays tiger woods 2008 on. I plan to upgrade him to a Pentium D 820 and 2GB RAM on a cheapo ECS board that has integrated Chrome9 HC IGP graphics. Will the "upgrade" lol play the game better then the Geforce 3?

thanks

 

[taltamir]

where exactly are you going to find such an upgrade? those haven't been manufactured for YEARS... And how much will that upgrade cost.

 

[nonameo]

Probably not... integrated graphics are not that great.

 

[taltamir]

it IS a geforce 3 though it is competing against... thing is... I have no idea how much performance a chrome9HC has, or what the hell IS a chrome9... If it was a 780G or a geforce 8xxx IGP I'd say the IGP would win... barely. those are tough comparisons to make because people don't really make them...

 

[tokie]

i was under the impression that the 780G was somewhat comparable in performance to a radeon 9700?

 

[alcoholbob]

Geforce 3 was a beast back in its day. I imagine it would be still decent if there was a way to disable anything involving shaders, shadows, and dynamic lighting, lol.

 

[Gorrillasnot]

I kinda figured the Chrome9 wouldn't be very good, but thought I'd ask. The upgrade motherboard I'm going to use also has a PCI express slot so I probably will find a cheapo real graphics card and not use the on board.

thanks all

 

[Bateluer]

If the board has a PCIe slot, just spend the extra 30 to 35 dollars and get a Radeon 4350.

 

[nosfe]

i've found a notebook review with a chrome9 hc, it had ~1.9k points in 3dmark 2001 and ~30fps in quake3, compared to some other review i found with desktop parts where the gf3 had ~6.8k points in 3dmark 2001 and ~160fps in quake3 so i'd say that you need another motherboard/igp

 

[tcsenter]

I presume you are referring to the PC CHIPS P53G, which I happen to be using. I also have a Foxconn P4M9007MB with the same P4M900 chipset. Back in December 2008, I tested the following PCI Express x16 cards on both motherboards (using latest BIOS):

GeForce 8400GS (PCI-E 1.0)
GeForce 9400GT (PCI-E 2.0)
Radeon HD 3650 (PCI-E 2.0)

All cards were stable and completed several passes of 3DMark 2003 and 2005, but the Radeon HD 3650 seems to be under-performing by at least 20% on both P4M900 boards, using Catalyst 8.10 and 8.11 drivers. Radeon HD 3650 should out-perform 9400GT by a safe margin but consistently scored on-par with or lower than 9400GT.

I don't know whether it is an ATI driver problem, a chipset problem, or what. I suppose it is possible the single-core Celeron D that I used is impacting the ATI card more than the NVIDIA card (comparative benchmarks I checked used fairly high-end dual core processors), but that explanation doesn't sit well with me. I am currently running Radeon X1650 PRO without any issues but I haven't benchmarked it and don't run 3D apps that would be demanding enough to expose any performance issues.

I would recommend GeForce 8500GT or 9400GT (which have similar performance), either of which can be found under $40.00. Or if you really need to save another $10, this:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16814500025


If you haven't purchased the motherboard yet, you might look for something similarly "cheapo" with a different chipset, such as Intel 945GC, Intel G31, or GeForce 7050. All have the same or slightly better specs than VIA P4M900 but with less of the weirdness that VIA's PCI Express and SATA implementation has shown (repeatedly).

 

[Gorrillasnot]

Thanks for the replies everyone.
The motherboard is a ECS P4M900T-M leftover from a Fry's combo. It is the second board as the first one had to be RMA'd. If this board should croak like the first one I'll try a different cheapo brand board probably with an nvidia IGP chipset.
In the meantime I think I'll look through the FS/FT forum and look for a cheap vid card

thanks

 

[Stumps]

IIRC the Chrome9 was apart of the VIA P4M800/900 Chipset and it supports DX9, it should be faster than the GF3 but not by a great deal.