Jump to content

low frame rates Dell Inspiron E1505 / 6400 Geforce Go 7300


farfigs11

Recommended Posts

512mb ram and ACPI installed.  ICH7

I've had Win98SE installation success as I stated in the "slipstreamable Intel infs" topic.  It's proved  a great laptop for browsing and youtube.  But I soon discovered it is crippled when it comes to graphics performance and DVD watching.  3DMark03 shows frame rates are 28fps on first game and 1-3 fps on all the others which is at least 10 times less than expected.  DVD watching is like 'plug and pray' as the video will play for a few seconds and then turn to what looks like a barber's pole or freeze system.  

A couple of settings:  I'm using NV8269 video driver which after installing I realized I needed to set the NV PowerMizer to maximum power savings or screen would cut out, go black, and come back on especially when accessing a USB drive (as this requires more power).  It needed Rlowe's memory patch with /m option to get it to load completely to Windows-otherwise it would freeze with a black screen about the time you'd expect to see the mouse pointer.  And adding the split8mb option would freeze it too.   

I've seached for tweaking tips and made a few changes to system.ini hoping it would help
[vcache]
MinFileCache=262144
MaxFileCache=262144
Chunksize=512
 
Which seemed to buy me a couple more minutes of DVD watching before it would freeze or stutter.

Anyone else have this kind of thing happen with NV8269 and ICH7?

Anyone have any suggestions?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


You are not telling your processor, please tell us more about your hardware configuration.

"NV8269"
If you have an older NVidia card, maybe you'll have better performance with older driver. With My GeForce2 I had much better performance with some 45~.xx driver version (don't remamber exact one).

As for video playing performance, on one of the forums I saw the following advice about best players for weak PCs on Win98, and this advice is based on significant amount of testing of many players and their versions on 400 MHz CPU.

AVI - Gom player 2.1.16.4635

DVD - WinDVD 4.0.B11.457C01 with DVD codecs from WinDVD 7 (non free, not sure if obtainable legally)

FLV, MP4 - MPlayer (some custom build from 16-07-2009)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's got a Core 2 Duo T7400 processor and I'm using a GN-WS30N-RH wireless network card. The hard drive and dvd are sata drives. Intel 945 chipset.

I have another laptop with a pentium M, Intel 915 chipset and a Geforce Go 7800 GTX using the NV 8269 driver with no performance issues and frame rates around at least 200fps on first game test of 3DMark03.

The pentium M's don't quite cut it anymore in Windows XP watching Netflix with Silverlight. 

I've tried Roxio Cineplayer 2.2 and PowerDVD 5.0.  Cineplayer plays a video a little longer but is just as "unstable" .  Pausing and then resume playing DVD will make computer unresponsive.  Sound can be heard but video is stuck where I last left off.   I think from here I will try the other NV driver versions and maybe disable the network card in case that's interfering somehow.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also have Maximus Decim's Nvidia driver for my 64mb Nvidia GEFORCE 440 MX AGP 8X i switched to that driver because it is more customizable than Forceware NVIDIA 81.98 DRIVER.

Unfortunately i can't turn off L1 and L2 cache on my GIGABYTE GA7VAX motherboard, there's no option in bios.

When i watch video/s some freeze and some play smoothly. And i had sudden random monitor blackouts as if screensaver is on which force me to restart, but that's not enough, i must wait around 3-5 minutes so i have the screen long enough to tweak system.ini and config.sys.

You will probably have problems (i had problems) with uninstalling nvidia driver/s both original and Maximus Decim's edition so get ready!

Try these steps:

Download Nasty File Remover (the reliable way to remove video drivers), auto patcher 2007, eusing free registry cleaner, aida32, HIMEMX (New memory manager), MSD (MicroSoft Diagnostic) and DirectX Buster (this is german language) and MemTest86.iso (burn to CD-R) I use IMGBURN (very good free program).

Note:Some of these files are in *.zip archives, you must extract them. I use 7-zip. (free and works on win 98 se).

Install ALL of those BEFORE YOU TRY TO REMOVE OR WORK WITH VIDEO DRIVER, SO YOU ARE READY. You don't have to install whole auto patcher as Nasty File Remover needs only ONE update (can't remember which one).

When you are ready, try to fix the driver:

1st of all try to Disable L1 and L2 cache, also disable video shadowing and overclock is a BIG sin. Set AGP APERTURE SIZE TO 128 MB. If it doesn't work, do things further in text. Also instead of HIMEM.SYS try HIMEMX (you turn it on in CONFIG.SYS )

1. Put MSD.EXE in  C:\MSD

2. RESTART AND HOLD RIGHT CTRL, GO TO COMMAND PROMPT ONLY

3. Open MSD and browse MEMORY REGIONS, go to UTILITY

4. Find ALL ROM ADRESSES AND WRITE THEM On PAPER

Example: Video ROM BIOS =C000-CC00

Option Rom=CC80-D2C0

And so on. Exit MSD.

5. Edit system.ini Example:

[386Enh]:

"EMMExclude=C000-CC00,CC80-D2C0"

Add line:

"DualDisplay=ON"

Save and reboot.

You could also Exclude those memory adresses from CONFIG.SYS, your choice. 

Example:

DEVICE=C:\DOS\EMM386.EXE X=C000-CC00 X=CC80-D2C0

6. Burn CD-R with MemTest86, go to BIOS, BOOT DEVICE PRIORITY, 

1st boot device = CD/DVD

And if CD/DVD IS ATTACHED ON PCI-SERIAL ATA ADAPTER then

1st boot device = SCSI

Save and exit.

Let MemTest86 run overnight and swap RAM STICKS SO ALL OF THEM ARE TESTED IN ALL SLOTS.

If all fails, remove Nvidia Driver with Nasty File Remover, clean registry with eusing free registry cleaner. Remove DirectX with DirectX Buster then clean registry again.

You might also try CCLEANER.

Your problem is memory related: when something attempts to write on video adapter's ROM, you lose screen and system freezes.

If my fix works, make sure to come back here and tell us. Good luck!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I found the nv82.16 driver and installed it.  I also disabled the network wireless card.  Then I adjusted powermizer down from max power savings to any other setting.  The effect was that it increased frame rates considerably. But, I also get the black screen randomly.

I didn't see any performance difference when adjusting powermizer with the nv82.69 driver.

Also, I found it interesting that in win98se (with either driver), dxdiag shows the nv7300 go card has 128mb ram but in XP it shows 256mb of ram

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, farfigs11 said:

Also, I found it interesting that in win98se (with either driver), dxdiag shows the nv7300 go card has 128mb ram but in XP it shows 256mb of ram

This card apparently uses the "memory banking system" that rloew and I discovered while experimenting with 512MB and larger nVidia cards. With rloew's NVSIZE patch you can make all 256MB of the cards memory usable under 98SE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, LoneCrusader said:

This card apparently uses the "memory banking system" that rloew and I discovered while experimenting with 512MB and larger nVidia cards. With rloew's NVSIZE patch you can make all 256MB of the cards memory usable under 98SE.

excellent, I remember reading about this but I couldn't put my finger on it.  I tried rloew's nvcheck and it returns "invalid size or unrecognized video card" 8 times.  I hoping it's the latter.  I'll contact RLoew and post back findings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

Apparently the Go 7300 is the G72 chip and the Go 7800gtx is the G70 chip.   So I'm thinking the NV driver is not compatible with the G72-at least with this laptop (Inspiron E1505).  Rloew supplied me with a test program and determined his patch was not necessary.  The Go7300 has 128mb physical ram and is able to use 128mb more system ram (in NT) for 256mb total.   I turned page filing off in 98se- but it didn't make any difference.  Since there isn't any alternitive 9x compatible video card that will mount correctly on this,  I rest my case with 98SE and this laptop.  I have moved on to the Inspiron 9400 / E1705 and I'm not dissappointed.:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GeForce Go 7300 has the same performance as the GeForce3 Ti200, with DX9 support put there just for the show.

Needless to say, it's nothing great, especially for 3DMark03. Try older games, it should not be that bad.

Also, I don't like how people still say the 82.69 drivers are unofficial. They are official, made by NVIDIA, the only unofficial part is the INF file which has the VEN/DEV for the 7xxx series included and CoolBits added. That's it. No one coded the 98SE support for the 7xxx series other than NVIDIA.

Here are the original 82.69 drivers:

http://nvidia.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/2054/~/windows-98%2Fme-resolution-support-for-1440-x-900-and-1680-x-1050

Not to mention, the OpenGL driver in 82.69 is unstable, unlike the 81.98 one.

And also, don't bother with anything better from NVIDIA than 6800 Ultra under 98SE. It's not worth it. The latest ATI card working under 98SE - Radeon X850 XT PE is better in 3DMark03 than the 6800 Ultra, and has official drivers. But it doesn't have Shader Model 3.0.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "unofficial" 82.69 Package is a mixture of different versions of "official" nVidia software.

The Kernel Mode Drivers and a few other files are official 82.69 Files.
Most of the other executables are official 82.16 Files. One is an official 77.72 File.
The .XML and .NVU text files are compacted versions of the 82.69 Versions.
The .INF File is substantially rewritten.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/2/2016 at 9:13 AM, MrMateczko said:

GeForce Go 7300 has the same performance as the GeForce3 Ti200, with DX9 support put there just for the show.

really? the geforce go 7300 has about the same performance as the geforce3 ti 200 with the only real difference is dx9 support? man, i wish there was actually a more proper passmark system, when you go on the videocardbenchmark.net, it has a poor way of comparing video cards, it doesn't actually put down the best or worst per say in performance, it has it's own way of determining how "good" a gpu is, for example, the ti 4600 has a passmark of 5, where as the geforce go 7300 has a passmark of 49 even though the ti 4600 is still technically "Faster" as it's faster in all comparisons with the ti 500, and even more so when compared with the go 7300 and ti 200. 

how bout the fx 5700le apg with 256 MB video memory? is  that card any good? i tried to ask about this but didn't get any responses specifically about this gpu, and what about the ti 4200 with 128 MB video memory?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I measured the performance based on this list:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nvidia_graphics_processing_units

GeForce3 Ti200 has the same amount of Pixel and Texel fillrate as the GeForce Go 7300.

The GeForce Go 7300 scores about 11-12k in 3DMark 2001SE, which is adequate for a Geforce3 Ti200 card with a CPU like the one in your laptop.

Ti 4200 128MB is faster than the FX 5700LE. And the 64MB variant is even faster, as the memory is clocked higher on the 64MB variant, and they put better memory chips on the 64MB variant, as they can overclock more than on the 128MB variant. Try getting the 64MB variant, or any of the other GeForce4 Ti cards, they are very good, especially for 98SE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, MrMateczko said:

I measured the performance based on this list:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nvidia_graphics_processing_units

GeForce3 Ti200 has the same amount of Pixel and Texel fillrate as the GeForce Go 7300.

The GeForce Go 7300 scores about 11-12k in 3DMark 2001SE, which is adequate for a Geforce3 Ti200 card with a CPU like the one in your laptop.

Ti 4200 128MB is faster than the FX 5700LE. And the 64MB variant is even faster, as the memory is clocked higher on the 64MB variant, and they put better memory chips on the 64MB variant, as they can overclock more than on the 128MB variant. Try getting the 64MB variant, or any of the other GeForce4 Ti cards, they are very good, especially for 98SE.

i see, but i think it would be more accurate if there was a 3DMark 2001SE done for the geforce go 7300 or some game benchmarks in comparison to the ti 200 or other cards with up to a few years apart in release to see which one is really faster. an example of this was a benchmark showing the ti 200 or ti 500 agp being as fast as the geforce 6200 agp. however, the point of comparison would be leaned towards slightly older games which is actually a better way to compare video cards as it would show the true performance of the gpu when compared with another one either older, newer or similar in the time of release, which is why texel / pixel account doesn't always determine how fast a gpu is. that being said, i suppose the ti 4200 agp universal with 128 MB video memory would be my best choice as of now for performance to cost ratio, they are selling them at a reasonable price on ebay in new other condition if anyone wants to buy them, i couldn't find any other graphics cards that were fast, reasonably priced, new AND supported agp 2x/1x ( agp 1.0 slots ).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Usually I don't play games, but maybe interesting to compare: I just ran 3DMark 03 on a G41/ ICH7/ Celeron 440/ NV7800GT(G70)/ driver NV82.16/ 2GB RAM/ WinME. The result was: 15415 3DMarks. And I ran 3DMark2001SE on a G31/ICH7/Core2 DUO E8400/NV7900GS(G71)/ driver NV82.69/ 2GB RAM/ WinME: The result was 39454. 3DMark03 stops during the loading of first test on the second machine (message "Out of memory"). These are no laptops.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...