Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble

MSFN is made available via donations, subscriptions and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. Alternatively, register and become a site sponsor/subscriber and ads will be disabled automatically. 



Cawsign

Member
  • Content count

    7
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Cawsign

Profile Information

  • OS
    98SE
  • Country
  1. That res I'm pretty sure is 16:10 ratio. There are some 'affordable' Hanns G panels in the 27"-28" range offering it. We had an early "square faced" model where the capacitors gradually died. Later "smiley faced power light" models seem reliable enough. If I see one for cheap enough I might get one or two again. 16:10 dual monitor setup would be pretty sweet... Replying to the original post, I really don't get what OP is complaining about. I know windows 10 sucks, but I'm on Devuan w/LXDE... I miss having some games and a working copy of Paint.NET, but those two things aside I'm not at a loss at all. If anything whatever you get that's based on debian tends to be rock solid. That said, I'm using old hardware and so I'm not trying "vulcan" or "freesync" or anything.
  2. ATI Radeon X1800XT for Windows 9x?

    This is what I'm looking at: Radeon X800 XL Feb. 2, 2005 R430 110nm 256MB 400MHz 980MHz 16:6:16:16 6400 6400 600 31GB/s GDDR3 256 Radeon X1800 XT Oct. 5, 2005 R520 90nm 256MB 625MHz 750MHz 16:8:16:16 10000 10000 1250 48GB/s GDDR3 256 The 90nm cards require even more heat and power than the 130nm cards did. Why is that if it's a more efficient process? Because in spite of "RingMemoryTechnologyTM" and "revolutionary new architecture" all they did was find a way of upping the stable clock speed. You can change the thin film that the transistors are printed on, but what you've got are the same copper traces to the same logic as before. That's not the only speculative reason I've got for trying it. I think Catalyst 6.2 under windows XP might well support the X1800 series, so the card already had support in this version. For one reason or another ATI locked them out, and they did it in a way which was more sophisticated than cutting them from the INI file. Perhaps catastrophic instability is the reason. Perhaps they just didn't want to support 9x and were for reasons unknown to me, thorough in blocking it. Whatever the case you get articles like this one: http://www.hexus.net/tech/reviews/graphics/3603-ati-radeon-x1800-xt-preview/?page=2 which says: "Outwardly, R520 is essentially, and ATI will hate me for saying so, little more than a highly clocked R480." Good news for me! Except that it also says not long afterwards: "feeding everything with a new memory controller"... A new memory controller which probably doesn't behave the same way an R430's did. Now then, like a christmas pudding, the proof will probably come from the eating. Speaking of which I'll probably have to wait until after christmas before these cards even arrive. So we can argue over whether Bill Gates intended it or not sometime in the new year. I bought the card specifically for this experiment, so it's likely that's what we're going to do.
  3. ATI Radeon X1800XT for Windows 9x?

    9x is a convenient platform that lets me learn what happens if I mess with a vBIOS GPU ID, and it lets me do that using a card that doesn't cost 400 dollars. The result could help to preserve or to improve BillGatesOS and it's residual software, but any of that helpful stuff is academic. Motivations be damned all that I'm hoping for is an interesting result. "Yeah I bricked the card" is the likeliest verdict and then all of the "I told you so"s will come pouring down like tears in rain
  4. ATI Radeon X1800XT for Windows 9x?

    The long winded explanation is this: I've ordered both an X850XT and a Connect3d X1800XT (256MB). I'm going to use the X850 to confirm 9x support on the mainboards that I've got. After that I'm swapping out 9x and the X850 for Windows XP and the newer X1800XT. If the newer card proves to be stable and in working order, I'm going to experiment with vBIOS modding using Windows XP. Gpucore @ 650MHz (up from 625), coreV at 1.4V, memcore @ 760MHz (up from 750). The card won't be blazing fast but I'll get a feel for vBIOS mods through this. If everything still works then I can try the risky stuff next and try to make the X1800 identify itself as an R420 or R480 series card. Somewhere in the back of my mind I've heard about this before and it bricked the card But ideally I would like to find a Connect3d vBIOS for an X800XL, so that I can compare the two. If (note: a lot of "ifs" here) it works, then it'll raise the possibility of modifying other R520 & R580 series cards for use in 9x machines. It wouldn't topple the 7900 series crown I don't think, but improved ATI performance and greater parts availability would hopefully be the result. tl;dr A lot of ifs and hopes, and the method is convoluted. I might learn something along the way though. That's the only useful reason to do it.
  5. ATI Radeon X1800XT for Windows 9x?

    Right now all I have is a bunch of 780G series mainboards all loaded up with more RAM than 9x can handle. I'm going to get smaller sticks and see if my boards can support 9x and then if that's the case I'll wait for a cheap auction to end on the cards in question. It *probably* won't work. There's probably a reason ATI locked the cards out. Then again, that reason could have been benevolence and marketing mumbo jumbo. Its a long road before I'll get the chance to see for myself. But if you happen to have an X1800XT (256) lying around somewhere then it could be worth a try.
  6. ATI Radeon X1800XT for Windows 9x?

    Specifically comparing the X800XL and X1800XT (256mb) models you will notice a lot of parity, along with a small chance that a higher clocked X1800 might be able to masquerade as an older process gpu. I'm yet to compare PCBs or detailed block diagrams (such as this one https://techreport.com/review/8864/ati-radeon-x1000-series-gpus) as there are two other questions that I'm yet to answer; 1. Has the modified vbios idea already been tried? 2. Where could I find the exact x1800XT 256mb model that I want and get it cheaply enough to risk experimenting upon it? It'd be a modified X1800XT bios in function, but it would report an R430 and X800 ID and be treated by the video drivers as such. You'd definitely lose shader model 3 support and possibly fail to utilise the extra shader cores, but you might keep the higher clock rate than the flawed 110nm architecture could reach. If you can attain those clock rates, then you can have ATI hardware that's on par with the 7 series.
  7. Hello, first post here how y'all doing etc.. I'm interested in AMD/ATI hardware and I was wondering; If the last ATI drivers can't be tricked into allowing cards newer than the X800 series, then could you not modify the video BIOS of the R520 based X1800XT and make it pretend to be an R430 series gpu with X800XL hardware ID? I don't care about shader model 3 I just want the core clock speeds. So has anyone here got any experience with vBIOS modding?
×