What about a 6200 AGP on a Socket7?

Discussion relating to Socket 7 hardware.
User avatar
mamba
Senior K6'er
Posts: 160
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2003 7:42 am
Location: Italy

Post by mamba »

Can you testify with some screenshot such information?

candle_86
Newbie K6'er
Posts: 20
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2007 9:41 pm
Location: Texas
Contact:

Post by candle_86 »

not anymore no, i gave my 6200 away to a friend using a PCI MX200.

User avatar
mamba
Senior K6'er
Posts: 160
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2003 7:42 am
Location: Italy

Post by mamba »

Do you remember the exact model?

candle_86
Newbie K6'er
Posts: 20
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2007 9:41 pm
Location: Texas
Contact:

Post by candle_86 »

no, i can get that info for you though, it came in a box saying just Nvidia on it, AGP 2x/4x/8x written on box

Prime
Newbie K6'er
Posts: 9
Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2006 8:51 pm
Location: Alberta, Canada

Nvidia AGP Voltage

Post by Prime »

Here is a link to a forum discussion on Nvidia AGP voltages I came across.
http://hardware.mcse.ms/archive55-2006-1-276479.html
It may help you with your research.

User avatar
mamba
Senior K6'er
Posts: 160
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2003 7:42 am
Location: Italy

Post by mamba »

There is no reason to put a NV44A 6200 cause is a poor performer.
Even a 8500 or a 5200 (128bit) is better than this.

smart
Newbie K6'er
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2007 3:40 pm

Post by smart »

Mamba, all the solution is in the 1st link you gave (playtool...). I've just tried that:

MSI 6163 Pro (BX440) + PNY 6600 GT 128M

the result is ..... KO.

I've a photo of the 6600GT : it has the 3.3V connector, that is why I did try.

The boot was OK, install drivers OK, reboot OK, Windows loads and ...black screen.
In www...playtool, it says:
" You can also occasionally get memory resource conflicts by installing a new AGP video card into an old AGP 1.0 motherboard. The video card will work properly until you install the display driver. Once you try to install the driver, a memory conflict shows up. The range of conflicting addresses varies from case to case. This problem is very unusual and when it happens it is rarely possible to fix it. I'm not sure exactly what causes the problem but apparently the motherboard and the video card are incompatible in some way which prevents Windows from properly assigning memory addresses to the video card. In the cases I've seen, there doesn't seem to be any way to predict from the video card chipset and motherboard chipset whether there will be a problem. Sometimes a particular video card chipset and motherboard chipset get along well and other times they don't. I'd guess that it's some kind of incompatibility caused by an outdated motherboard BIOS and possibly the video card BIOS. The one thing you can try is to flash your motherboard with the most recent BIOS. But since it's an old motherboard, the manufacturer will most likely not have anything but old BIOSes available. If you're running Windows 95, 98, or ME, it may be possible to manually assign addresses and get it to work but I've seen people try this and the process is about as enjoyable as a root canal and usually fails to fully solve the problem anyway. If you're running Windows 2000 or XP then it's probably impossible to fix because the newer versions of Windows almost always prevent you from manually assigning addresses, IRQs, etc. That's almost always true even if you select the standard PC HAL while installing Windows with the hope that it will allow you to assign resources manually. If you run into one of these memory resource conflicts then you should probably give up and try a different video card. It's rarely fixable.
"

I should try Win 98, or linux or a FX 5900 ...

Good Luck
$mart

Jim
K6'er Elite
Posts: 1745
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2004 7:10 pm
Location: Toronto

Post by Jim »

You might try taking a look at this thread. Different video card, but same problem.

http://k6plus.com/index.php?name=PNphpB ... 76bfd58249

Long time ago, I had similar problems getting my ATI 9000 to work in an ASUS P5A-B Rev104. I went on line to Microsoft and they told me how to solve it, though I have long since forgotten how.
Superpuppy 3
K6-3+ 450 ACZ (6x100)
DFI K6BV3+/66 Rev B2 (2 Meg) w/ 2x28mm Chipset Fans
2x256 Meg PC 133 Hynix SDRAM
1x 20G Maxtor (7200)
2x 80G Maxtor (7200) Ducted w/ 2x486 Fans Mount
52/24/52/16 LG CDR/RW/DVD
8/4/3/12/24/16/32 LG Super Multi
ATI 9000 aiw Radeon AGP
SB Audigy 1 MP3 Sound
CMD 649 IDE Controller
NEC USB 2 Card

User avatar
mamba
Senior K6'er
Posts: 160
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2003 7:42 am
Location: Italy

Post by mamba »

Now I'm running a FX5700 on an MVP3G5 board with no problems.
The SO is XP SP2.

I think that the fx5700 is faster than the 6200 so I stay that way,

User avatar
Stedman5040
Veteran K6'er
Posts: 271
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2005 4:22 pm

Post by Stedman5040 »

How good is your SS7 system with regards to some of the simple benchmarks? What is your best superpi 1m score with your set up? How fast can you run the fsb?

It would be interesting to compare your scores with the MVP3G2 board. We can then see how much influence 1m of extra L3 cache is worth.

What is your complete set up?

Stedman

User avatar
mamba
Senior K6'er
Posts: 160
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2003 7:42 am
Location: Italy

Post by mamba »

K6-II+ @ 600MHz
MVP3G5
512Mbyte PC133 (2x256Mbyte)
80Gbyte HD Maxtor
Nvidia FX5700
SB Audigy 2

the best VGA result come with the 52.16 WHQL with MVP3G2, there are no improvements with the MVP3G5

Image

User avatar
mamba
Senior K6'er
Posts: 160
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2003 7:42 am
Location: Italy

Post by mamba »

I was wrong.

These are the 3dmark2001 results for the mvp3g5

Image


200 points more.

Post Reply