Radeon X800 XL AGP runs horrible in my old PC

[BauleyF1]

Originally posted by: Captante
While your game benchmarks might be cpu-limited with the X800XL, theres no way ANY game won't run faster on it then on a GeForce 4 unless its so old that newer drivers simply don't support said game anymore which isn't a hardware problem.

So, the ATI drivers don't support the older games? I don't understand why it did so well in the benchmark but played a game like F1 Challenge 99-02 so horribly.

Since the nvidia drivers obviously work fine for the older games, would a GeForce 6600 be better for me? Does that suck power like an ATI does?

 

[Captante]

Nvidia drivers fail to work with lots of older games too, apparently they work with the games you play though so you might be better off going with an Nvidia card instead, however its going to be tough to match the performance of that X800XL for a reasonable amount of money in AGP... you would need to get a 7600GT AGP to do it in fact & the 6600GT will be a lot slower, either will use a lot less power then the XL though.

Regardless of what new card you end up going with, you really need to replace your power supply with somthing decent.. even a relatively cheap Antec 350/380 watt model would beat the heck out of the 160 watt model you are using now.

 

[BFG10K]

In case you have a winchester, that x800xl will give you a 0% boost.

Utter nonsense.

 

[Captante]

Originally posted by: BFG10K

In case you have a winchester, that x800xl will give you a 0% boost.

Utter nonsense.

Consider the source!

 

[dguy6789]

Originally posted by: BFG10K

In case you have a winchester, that x800xl will give you a 0% boost.

Utter nonsense.

He is trying. He corrected himself later on. He meant to say Willamette. In that case, I would primarily agree, as one would be terribly cpu limited on a 2Ghz Willy.

 

[lyssword]

Try running older ati drivers, like version 5.0 or something..

 

[BauleyF1]

Well, I sold the card already. Tired of dealing with it, hopefully it will work for the new owner.

 

[EvanAdams]

And that is why I avoid the FS/FT area.

 

[SilverTrine]

I was like you, just assumed AGP is AGP and tried to use an X800xl in an old KT400 board.
Everything appeared to work well until I tried to run 3d games. Wouldnt work. Looked like a textbook case of bad ram so I sent the card back and got a new one.
Tried it same thing.

Upgraded to an Athlon 64 system tried the card and it worked fine. I discovered AGP isnt a standard on that day and it varies greatly from board to board. Newer AGP cards dont work on a lot of older boards.

 

[BauleyF1]

Originally posted by: EvanAdamsAnd that is why I avoid the FS/FT area.

It's clearly a hardware compatibility issue. My PSU isn't big enough, or something in my BIOS is messed up, or whatever. The card works, it scored fine on 3dmark. I was just tired of trying to make it work.

Originally posted by: SilverTrineUpgraded to an Athlon 64 system tried the card and it worked fine. I discovered AGP isnt a standard on that day and it varies greatly from board to board. Newer AGP cards dont work on a lot of older boards.

Makes sense.

 

[BFG10K]

He is trying. He corrected himself later on. He meant to say Willamette. In that case, I would primarily agree, as one would be terribly cpu limited on a 2Ghz Willy.

I don't think you realize just how much faster a X800XL is over a Ti4200. He should see a massive performance gain even if he's on an original Celeron.

 

[BauleyF1]

Originally posted by: BFG10K

He is trying. He corrected himself later on. He meant to say Willamette. In that case, I would primarily agree, as one would be terribly cpu limited on a 2Ghz Willy.

I don't think you realize just how much faster a X800XL is over a Ti4200. He should see a massive performance gain even if he's on an original Celeron.

Did you see my 3d mark scores? The gains WERE huge, I just didn't see them in the games I was playing.

 

[Mavrick007]

OK, first off, if you are going to run 3dmark, don't use 2003 for your comparison using a Ti4200 since that card will register really low anyway (DX8.1 card compared to the DX9 card of the x800XL). You will want to try 3dmark2001SE which will make your results much closer for the Ti4200 and the x800XL but the X800XL should still give you a higher score. And second, if you want to see what the card will do, try a newer game which came out in the past couple years and not an 4+ years older game for your comparison. Try something like FarCry, HL2 or Doom3 because those we know what the results generally are going to be for that type of hardware. Who knows, maybe those games (F1 Challenge or Nascar 2002) do not work well with newer ATI cards, but I bet it you turned on AA with the TI4200, it would chug too. If your results are still skewed for the cards, then something is having issues, be it drivers, etc.

I realize you sold your card already and you probably can't do these types of tests now (if you've shipped it already), but I bet that x800XL card was a pretty decent card if you were receiving such scores with 3dmark03 (just synthetic, but still). Now if all you want to play are the 4+ year older games, then maybe your Ti4200 is good enough or maybe you can compare to someone's newer Nvidia card such as a GF6600GT if you could borrow one.

 

[wwswimming]

i had the same thing happen with an X800XT on an Asus P4C800 motherboard.

way slower than the nVidia 5600 it replaced. i gave it a half hour diddling with the
drivers, and then set up an RMA. ended up with a 6600 AGP for that computer.

on the other hand, the X850XT PCI-E on another machine, works great.

 

[eBauer]

ATI cards have always had sub-par performance under Nascar 2002. Either pick up a Nvidia card or buy Nascar 2003

 

[Stumps]

Originally posted by: akshayt
In case you have a winchester, that x800xl will give you a 0% boost. With a north wood things should be better.

Damn you post some crap....try doing a little research before posting.


now to Answer the OP, most likely your problem is a combination of a couple of things,

First off ,YES your CPU and YOUR system. will bottleneck the X800XL, however you should still get a major improvement over the old Ti4200.

Secondly, If you are using older games then you will probably not see any improvement, generally due to driver limitations, and the fact that some older games will use graphic techniques that no longer are optimised on newer Video cards.

but I'm pretty sure that this has already been covered.

 

[AndrewL]

You probably dont care anymore but take a look at benchmarks for the games you play (if there are any) and see which cards perform best with those games. Also if the the x800xl was running the game on full settings (you said AA and AF from CCC) getting 25 fps and the ti4200 was running lower settings then you cant even really make a logical comparison. Its most likely a driver issue and theres no gaurantee any other new card will run those games well. The 99-02 game, does that mean you have all the versions from 99-02? A game from 1999 would be highly questionable.

 

[kmmatney]

Were they OpenGL games? Probably not, but the X800XL isn't great at OpenGl. It should still be faster than the Ti4200 though.

 

[evolucion8]

Originally posted by: kmmatney
Were they OpenGL games? Probably not, but the X800XL isn't great at OpenGl. It should still be faster than the Ti4200 though.

Well, it used to be, even though it may trail in OpenGL, is a very slight margin, ATi has done great job optimizing it's OpenGL driver, now you can see even in games like Quake 4 and Prey, the X800XL matching or outperforming the 6800GT, something that didn'
t happen when the X800XT PE debut and was far behind the 6800GT in Doom 3. Look here on Prey, a Doom 3 based game, how the X800XL outperforms the 6800GT, albeit the X800XL there is a 512MB version, but at the standard resolution of 1024x768, with 4X FSAA and 16x Aniso, more VRAM is not an advantage here. http://www23.tomshardware.com/graphics....elx=33&model1=545&model2=567&chart=213