Matt,
Thanks again.
The guy who built my computer gave me a temporary board to use until
SuperMicro came out with their new 4x AGP slotted board, and then he said he
would just swap them out with only the difference in cost to pay. I liked
that idea, so did it. Today I found out from SuperMicro that the new board
is not due until the 2nd quarter of this year....still 2 months away.
until then my old Millennium is it. Since this current board does not have
any AGP slot.....2x or 4x. The good side is that I do not have to select
and pay for a new graphic card yet.
The bad side is I just hope the guy remembers our deal in 3 months.
Last night I did the CMOS thing.....read your notes, and read the web site
you gave me. Reset it all to the lower numbers and hit F10 and
return.....then it took me another 1/2 hour to get my system to go back to
the optimal settings and boot up. I have no idea how to back up the bios,
and I am not sure it would have mattered. I mean if it is just a black
screen and it doesn't even turn the green light on for the floppy during
boot up, it ain't going to be able to change my bios back for me.
What did work was continually turning the machine off, waiting 30 seconds
and then turning it back on with my finger on the DEL key. Then the fun
would start. Finally I figured I had about 3 keyboard clicks before it all
went south. So I finally booted into the CMOS and just hit F9 and enter.
That didn't look like it worked, but when I tried again....I was back to
normal and it all booted up.
So now all the clicks that were 3 and then 2 are now 3 again. The rest are
also set at their highest numbers, and I turned on the Video Cache again for
the first two. The rest of the Shadow items I left Disabled.
Most of the names of the click things do not match up to what you listed or
what is listed in the web site.
I guess it is fast enough as it is......never will be.
thanks.
Jack
"Matt Stachoni" wrote in message news:rt0e6tgiag
km2304091bqsgkq7gfdp2s7f@4ax.com...
> Jack,
>
> Yeah, you trusty old Millenium is not helping matters at all - your CPU is
doing
> a ton of work in VIZ, and the 4MB is limiting you on how much color depth
you
> are getting at higher resolutions in Windows. You really need to get a
decent
> AGP card in the box, with at least 32MB of onboard RAM. nVvidia-based
graphics
> cards are pretty much the best, in terms of overall performance across 2D
and
> 3D, and driver support is pretty much top notch.
>
> Check out www.nvidia.com to get an idea of what their different chipsets
are,
> and shop around for graphics cards based on those chipsets - you will
probably
> find that there is a wide range of pricing, from about $150 to over $500
on
> various cards - but each one has features you may not care about or need
if you
> aren't into TV output or 3D glasses.
>
> For AutoCAD, the old rules from about 5 years ago no longer apply. Any
processor
> capable of running WIndows is going to run AutoCAD just fine - regens are
no
> longer any measure of performance, since they are non-existent on modern
> machines. For 3D work, because of the elevated CPU capabilities of today,
the
> graphics card is less of a centralized choke point. Above a certain number
of
> polygons, however, the card's onboard memory and processors make a
difference in
> modeling performance.
>
> I have a Creative Labs TnT2-Ultra in my home machine, and it's really
quite
> capable for most low-end 3D work, and is great for games. Anything based
on the
> GeForce line, which is a step above the TnT2, will be fine also. Then you
get to
> the GeForce2 line, which is yet another step up in terms of 3D
performance.
>
> If you go with a Matrox G4x0 card, you could go with any of the three
mentioned.
> I'm using a G400 at work temporarily, until I put in my replacement Elsa
Gloria
> II which is still sitting in the box right next to me. The G400 is still a
fine
> all around card, and both ADT and VIZ run fine. Not fantastic in
high-polygon
> models in VIZ, but acceptable for most work. The Gloria II, on the other
hand,
> is an all-around kick a%% card. Fantastic in Windows 2D, 3D games, ADT and
VIZ.
>
> The differences in the G400 and G400 MAX is the clock frequency on the
card -
> this is important only for gamers, who require the absolute highest FPS
they can
> get in Quake or Unreal. The G450 is the successor the the G400 chipset,
and it
> adds better performance. Reviews of the G450 are essentially the same as
they
> are on the G400 - capable for Windows business apps, runs Acad, ADT and
VIZ, but
> not the cards of choice for gamers, cost being about equal.
>
> Matt
> stachoni@bellatlantic.net
>
> On Wed, 17 Jan 2001 21:37:02 -0800, "Jack Talsky"
wrote:
>
> >I am a fan of Matrox too, but when I ask people who are into 3d a
> >bit....like in 3dStudio Viz, they say to get the NVIDIA GeForce2 GTS type
> >cards....and that the G400 or G450 are not too good for 3d.
> >
> >And if getting a Matrox card, would one be better with the G400, the G400
> >MAX, or the G450?
> >
> >Mostly I do 2D and internet, but want to get going in 3d with Viz and ADT
> >making architectural walk-through type stuff.
> >
> >I am currently getting ready to get a new card. The present one is my
old
> >trusty Matrox Millennium with 4 meg of Wram. Not the millennium II
> >either....but the original one. With my new dual Pentium III 933 cpu's
it
> >has improved by 1000 percent over how it worked before. But I think it
is
> >mostly the cpu doing it. In fact it works so well right now that even
Viz
> >works great...I can animate a rendered object and it moves around without
> >losing the shading or rendering. Before it always became a wire frame.
>