• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About policyvote

  • Rank
  1. policyvote

    1 Terabyte home pc advice

    Riiight. It's REALLY so you can point at your home PC and say, "You know, there's a terabyte of storage in there." But just to save face for ya, I'll go along with your database story. Peace policy
  2. policyvote

    News from Matrox...

    Told 'ya so. That article's a pretty decent read--and I apologize for the above gloatage. I deeply doubt the utility of TriHead gaming--very few of us have three displays of equal (or roughly equal) ability. Also, having a gap in between the displays would do a lot to harm whatever "immersion" is created by the effect. I think the only solution would be to find three used laptops with high-quality displays, break them out of their cases, and fabricate some sort of three-way frame--THEN you'd have your immersive experience. Peace policy
  3. policyvote

    News from Matrox...

    Right, but in this case, the "idea" was a GPU with very powerful vertex and pixel shadera, MS's new "displacement mapping", and all sorts of other things that either hadn't been invented yet, or was only available in kabillion-dollar SGI equipment. You can't start designing something around specifications (DX7, DX8, DX9) that the specifier hasn't even thought of specifying yet--and you can't just "add on" things like fully programmable pixel/vertex shaders at the last minutel; these things would be integral to the design of the core. As I said, the earliest this thing could have possibly been in development is about a year and a half to two years ago, when DX8 and GF3 were in the midst of devleopment. Peace policy
  4. policyvote

    News from Matrox...

    I find it somewhat amsuing that everyone (not necessarily everyone on this forum, or in this thread, but 'everyone' in a general sense) assumes that Matrox has spent every waking moment since the G400 MAX developing this, the Holy Grail of all video cards--and that when it is released, it will be the most rock-solid piece of hardware ever, because it's been on, like, a 42 month dev cycle. The fact is that there's no way a card that's been three or four years in the making could be released as a finished DX9 product--four years ago, directX was still the red-headed MS stepchild of 3D APIs, and vertex/pixel shaders on a consumer 3D card wasn't even a pipe dream yet. As an example, the original Radeon was supposed to be a DirectX 8 card, but MS beefed up the pixel/vertex shader requirements too late in the Radeon's dev cycle. If a little change like that forced ATi to release a card that didn't fully implement the newest version of DirectX, how dd Matrox predict years ago what DirectX would be like three full versions down the road? I'm pretty sure that at least some of that dev time was spent developing the never-released G800, and I'm sure the G450 and 550 used up manpower, too. So, the earliest this thing could have been in development was a year and a half ago, and they've probably been making constant changes since then, to keep up with the changes in DirectX. Don't get me wrong! I'm not saying that the G1000 won't be awesome, or stable--I fully expect it to be both. I've been a big cheerer-on of Matrox, especially since the G400 MAX (which was a great card). However, I wouldn't expect a new card from them to outperform (by 20%) the current 3D champ, especially from a company that has never held the post-Quake 3D crown, and hasn't even taken a stab at it in years. And though I might be remembering something else, IIRC the last time they DID take a stab at it, they didn't write a full OGL ICD for it until many moons after its release (it would accelerate QII because they wrote a QII specific mini ICD, but any other game or 3D program was unaccelerated). So, to say they "always take their time to get it done right with perfect drivers" is not really true. Again--I'm not Matrox-bashing, but as with any new peice of hardware, I'm waiting until the silicon hits the streets before pimping it. Peace policy
  5. policyvote

    * need motherboard recommendation *

    Okay, here's the report from my buddy: with the RAM installed, the computer POSTs and runs A-okay. However, whenever a memory-intensive program (Sandra, for example) runs, the machine immediately reboots. Neither putting it in another machine, nor changing all the BIOS settings to their most conservative helped. The RAM, apparently, is just flaky. Ick. Peace policy
  6. policyvote

    * need motherboard recommendation *

    Okay, lemme try to answer all of these: * PSU is an Enermax 431W Whisper model--if that's the problem, I'll eat my hat * Memory is two sticks of ECC, UNbuffered, Crucial memory (256 MB apiece). I tried them at every concievable BIOS setting, I tried switching slots, I tried EEC on, ECC off, I tried everything. Then, after a few weeks of "trying everything", I think I either flexed the mobo too much, or static-zapped my RAM (despite wearing a strap). Now the stupid thing doesn't even POST. Like I said, my buddy's checking the RAM, and if that turns out okay, we'll see if other RAM will get it to work. * I used both a Duron 600 and an AXP 1700+, both singly (didn't have the cash for duallies at the time), both in socket 0. I have a Vantec 6035D, so cooling shouldn't be an issue. I guess it's possible that the socket is bad, or that the board isn't stable without two processors. * For a while, I thought it might be the Promise ATA133 controller I was using. I talked to Promise, and they actually called Promise Taiwan to get a board identical to mine for testing purposes. As far as I know, they never replicated my FSB error, so never found the solution (or at least, they quite when they realized it wasn't their fault). * just called my friend, and he says the RAM POSTs in his board, but is unstable. A cell phone call came just as I called him, so details are yet forthcoming. Peace policy
  7. policyvote

    * need motherboard recommendation *

    Oh, I had problems with it from the get-go, but the vendor (www.essencompu.com)'s RMA procedure was completely nonfunctional, and I couldn't get them to respond before their own deadline passed. Part of the problem is that I bought Crucial RAM, which isn't approved. I'm currently having a friend stress test said RAM (I don't have any other DDR boxes) for a few days. The board ran just fine at 100 MHz FSB, but any higher and the thing would hard crash at the Win XP splash screen. If my buddy determines that the Crucial is okay, he'll trade me my Crucial for his (approved) Kingston, and I'll see if I can't get the God-forsaken thing to work. I've also had the "keyboard/IDE LED" error, the "jumperfree mode no worky" error, and every other stupid error that is native to this board. Bottom line is that it's just too buggy--after cashing out $250 for the first board off the truck, now I just want one that frickin' WORKS. I'm normally an EPoX kinda guy, but that board looks like it's been the pot 'o gold at the end of the rainbow since 2001. Gigabyte offers their very attractive daul-BIOS option, but performance usually lags with them. Abit or MSI could be tempting, but I don't think that they're coming any earlier than the EPoX, and EPoX is almost always cheaper, anyway. I guess I should wait until more boards end up in the users' hands, eh? Peace policy
  8. Sorry for such a lame post, all--but I've had it with this hunk-a-junk A7M266-D. Is there a stable, reliable, dually Socket A mobo out there? Is there a good one coming out soon that I should wait for? Or, should I save my money for Barton or ClawHammer? Help! :cry: Peace policy
  9. policyvote

    dual PCI bus?

    Again, as people have said, "only games" will not be enhanced by having many competing audio and video solutions--all you will do is increase the chance that something won't like something else and performance will be degraded! What you should do is wait for MSI's KT3 Ultra motherboard to come out (shouldn't be TOO long), then get yourself the fastest available Athlon, 512MB of DDR333, a Radeon 8500, an Audigy, and a single IDE drive (try a WD1000JB). Legacy games can be supported by running them in compatiblity mode on WinXP, or otherwise by the dual Voodoo2s, I guess. But DO NOT throw any more video cards, or more than one sound card in the box. This will be the way to get wicked performance. Peace policy
  10. Laurent: if you see the above post, you might have been right about the incompatibility thing after all. Thanks again for all of your help! Peace policy
  11. Okay, while playing with different memory configurations and jumper settings, it appears that my RAM is now ded. D-E-D, ded. The system will not POST (it was occasionally having problems POSTing before), though the mobo is clearly working (all attached fans and drives spin up, all lights on the mobo glow, etc.). So, I'm RMAing the Crucial and ordering some other memory (the stuff probably isn't comaptible with my mobo anyway, and they have a return policy for that). I'm looking at Kingston memory (feat. NANYA chips), which is certified by Asus to work in that mobo (my previously blind brand loyalty to Crucial prevented me from, uh, looking at that list previously). Anyone have any experiences to share with Kingston DDR? I don't want a repeat of this . . . Peace policy
  12. Thanks for replying! Actually, I didn't test the memory in another board--I tested it in this board! I used a stress test program that boots and from a floppy, eliminating the HDD/controller completely. I set the FSB to 133, booted to the stress test program, and the RAM passed all tests without an error. It's looking more and more to me like something is wrong with the motherboard--could it be that the southbridge has some sort of problem? could it not be correctly applying the PCI divider, so that at 133MHz FSB, the PCI bus is actually operating far our of spec, hence causing the errors? Peace policy
  13. Hate to be a bother, but does anyone have ANY ideas out there? Peace policy
  14. Hey, all. I've ben having a very, very, very persistent and strang problem. My machine will not run at 133 MH FSB, depite the fact that my motherboard (Asus A7M266-D), memory (Crucial ECC PC2100), and processor (Athlon XP 1700+) are all designed to run at that speed. My problem in detail is this: when running at 133 MHz FSB, Windows XP will not boot. The system POSTs, the bootup splash screen shows for a split second, then I get a BSOD and an error message that goes something like: "The system has encountered a serious error and has shut down Windows to protect your data. Please remove any new hard drives or hard drive controllers, then verifry the integrity of your hard drive with CHKDSK. STOP: Error (and then a bunch of hex codes)" Now for the freaky part--it runs just fine at 100 MHz FSB. Everything is 100% stable. Of course, this means I'm underclocking my processor by 366 MHz and losing out on a lot of memory bandwidth, but it's rock solid stable. I've used DocMemory to verify the memory is okay (ran stress test all night long @ 133 with nary an error), the problem happens with my old Duron, my CPU temps are pretty low (42 C under load), my PSU has plenty of juice to spare (Enermax 431W), I've tried the Promise controller card in 4 different PCI slots (and both 32/33 and 64/66 flavor slots). . . everything. Now, CHKDSK turns up no errors on my drive, but if I connect the hard drive directly to the MB controller, it goes into the splash screen . . . and stays there. Forever. So, my options are: 1) Promise controller doesn't like my board, and screws with my drive even if the drive isn't connected to the card (unlikely). 2) My motherboard is somehow messed up at the trace level and I need a new one 3) My drive is somehow faulty--but if that were the case, it wouldn't work at 100 MHz FSB either, since the dividers assure that the drive doesn't see any differeny PCI speed . . . Any other ideas out there? Peace policy
  15. I have the Ultra133TX2 (the ATA/133 card, as the name implies), and I'm having some serious issues--it could be the card, my motherboard, or the drive itself, but something's up. The reason I posted is that Promise's tech people were very helpful. The guy I got when I called their number couldn't identify the problem, so that guy's supervisor took over, he gave me his personal email address so we could discuss the problem specifics, and then called the main office in Taiwan to describe my problem and see if they could recreate (and then solve) it. Talk about going the extra mile! I haven't heard back yet, but this all happened this afternoon, so I wasn't expecting turnaround by tonight, anyway. Long story short: Promise's customer service seems to be top-notch. If I can get this issue resolved, then I can wholeheartedly reccommend them as sterling examples of what hardware vendors should be--as is, I can tell you that the Promise experience has been better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick, that's for sure. Peace policy