VOGONS


Calling 440BX (and LX) users...

Topic actions

Reply 20 of 62, by sliderider

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
sebaz_ri wrote:
AFAIK GF2 Ultra is based on 180nm process, while GF3 and Fx5200 are based of 150nm process,which runs cooler and draw less power […]
Show full quote
PowerPie5000 wrote:

Does anyone have any idea how much power a GF2 Ultra or even a GF3 Ti200 will draw? I wonder how they compare to the FX5200 in terms of power draw?

AFAIK GF2 Ultra is based on 180nm process, while GF3 and Fx5200 are based of 150nm process,which runs cooler and draw less power

If i have to choose between these cards i will choose the GF3 Ti200 and if that draws too much power, then the FX5200 is the way to go

For these cards, use 45.23 or 61.76 driver

ftp://download.nvidia.com/Windows/45.23/45.23 … ternational.exe

ftp://download.nvidia.com/Windows/61.76/61.76 … ternational.exe

GeForce 6200 and 6600 use a 110nm process so wouldn't they be even cooler and use even less power? If you are using a motherboard that has AGP power issues, then using a later card that draws less power rather than a period card that draws more seems like a simple solution.

Reply 21 of 62, by feipoa

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

What eletrical test are you guys using to detemine if the problem is actually due to power insufficiency?

Plan your life wisely, you'll be dead before you know it.

Reply 22 of 62, by PowerPie5000

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
sliderider wrote:
sebaz_ri wrote:
AFAIK GF2 Ultra is based on 180nm process, while GF3 and Fx5200 are based of 150nm process,which runs cooler and draw less power […]
Show full quote
PowerPie5000 wrote:

Does anyone have any idea how much power a GF2 Ultra or even a GF3 Ti200 will draw? I wonder how they compare to the FX5200 in terms of power draw?

AFAIK GF2 Ultra is based on 180nm process, while GF3 and Fx5200 are based of 150nm process,which runs cooler and draw less power

If i have to choose between these cards i will choose the GF3 Ti200 and if that draws too much power, then the FX5200 is the way to go

For these cards, use 45.23 or 61.76 driver

ftp://download.nvidia.com/Windows/45.23/45.23 … ternational.exe

ftp://download.nvidia.com/Windows/61.76/61.76 … ternational.exe

GeForce 6200 and 6600 use a 110nm process so wouldn't they be even cooler and use even less power? If you are using a motherboard that has AGP power issues, then using a later card that draws less power rather than a period card that draws more seems like a simple solution.

My Radeon 7950 (overclocked) uses a 28nm process and is rated at around 200W 🤣... Having a smaller die doesn't always mean the entire graphics card will consume less power, especially with higher clock speeds and transistor counts etc...

Reply 23 of 62, by sliderider

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
PowerPie5000 wrote:
sliderider wrote:
sebaz_ri wrote:
AFAIK GF2 Ultra is based on 180nm process, while GF3 and Fx5200 are based of 150nm process,which runs cooler and draw less power […]
Show full quote

AFAIK GF2 Ultra is based on 180nm process, while GF3 and Fx5200 are based of 150nm process,which runs cooler and draw less power

If i have to choose between these cards i will choose the GF3 Ti200 and if that draws too much power, then the FX5200 is the way to go

For these cards, use 45.23 or 61.76 driver

ftp://download.nvidia.com/Windows/45.23/45.23 … ternational.exe

ftp://download.nvidia.com/Windows/61.76/61.76 … ternational.exe

GeForce 6200 and 6600 use a 110nm process so wouldn't they be even cooler and use even less power? If you are using a motherboard that has AGP power issues, then using a later card that draws less power rather than a period card that draws more seems like a simple solution.

My Radeon 7950 (overclocked) uses a 28nm process and is rated at around 200W 🤣... Having a smaller die doesn't always mean the entire graphics card will consume less power, especially with higher clock speeds and transistor counts etc...

You're talking about a high end card, though. A Radeon HD7350 only draws 40W and is still faster than a GF3Ti or GeForce FX.

Reply 24 of 62, by PowerPie5000

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Thanks for all the replys guys... I'm not bothering with a Geforce as i'm going back to a Voodoo 5 5500 AGP instead (i got rid of my last one which was a mistake, and i know it works fine with my SE440BX2 mobo). Someone over at Amibay is kindly donating one (lucky me 😀).

I'm sure my motherboard could handle a Geforce card as i used a 64MB ATI Rage Fury Maxx for a while and a Hercules Radeon 8500 briefly a couple of years ago (which i totally forgot about). It's a shame i gave most of my old cards away as i could have properly tested them with my 440BX board... I'm sure there was a Kyro II in that bundle of cards too! All i have left now is a G400 Max (not my original one with Zalman cooler) and a Voodoo 3 3000. I should have a 12MB Voodoo 2 somewhere (did have 2, but one of them died 🙁).

Reply 25 of 62, by Mau1wurf1977

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
feipoa wrote:

What eletrical test are you guys using to detemine if the problem is actually due to power insufficiency?

Good point. None really. It's all speculation / best guessing to be honest. But at the moment it's the most explanation...

My website with reviews, demos, drivers, tutorials and more...
My YouTube channel

Reply 26 of 62, by gerwin

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

Soyo 6BA+III with an AGP TNT2 Vanta works fine, tested extensively.
Soyo 6BA+III with an AGP Geforce 2MX works fine, tested extensively.
Soyo 6BA+III with an AGP Geforce 2 Ti works fine, tested extensively.
Soyo 6BA+III with an AGP Geforce MX440 works fine, tested extensively.
Soyo 6BA+III with an AGP Geforce FX5200 gave problems,
did not want that card in the first place, it was a mislabeled sale.
Soyo 6BA+III with an AGP Geforce 6200 seemed to work ok, not tested very long.

Operating System being Windows 98SE.
I cannot recall any stability problems with games over DirectX-7A. For Example Ghost Recon and Strike Fighters (patch 2008): I could run them and quit them and run them again.

--> ISA Soundcard Overview // Doom MBF 2.04 // SetMul

Reply 27 of 62, by PowerPie5000

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
gerwin wrote:
Soyo 6BA+III with an AGP TNT2 Vanta works fine, tested extensively. Soyo 6BA+III with an AGP Geforce 2MX works fine, tested exte […]
Show full quote

Soyo 6BA+III with an AGP TNT2 Vanta works fine, tested extensively.
Soyo 6BA+III with an AGP Geforce 2MX works fine, tested extensively.
Soyo 6BA+III with an AGP Geforce 2 Ti works fine, tested extensively.
Soyo 6BA+III with an AGP Geforce MX440 works fine, tested extensively.
Soyo 6BA+III with an AGP Geforce FX5200 gave problems,
did not want that card in the first place, it was a mislabeled sale.
Soyo 6BA+III with an AGP Geforce 6200 seemed to work ok, not tested very long.

Operating System being Windows 98SE.
I cannot recall any stability problems with games over DirectX-7A. For Example Ghost Recon and Strike Fighters (patch 2008): I could run them and quit them and run them again.

Is the Soyo 6BA+ III one of the later BX boards? They probably fixed the AGP power issues with that one.

Why is it that CPU-Z and PC Wizard report my AGP slot as version 2.0 with my SE440BX-2 board? I'm pretty sure all BX boards are AGP 1.0.

Reply 28 of 62, by PowerPie5000

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
PowerPie5000 wrote:

Why is it that CPU-Z and PC Wizard report my AGP slot as version 2.0 with my SE440BX-2 board? I'm pretty sure all BX boards are AGP 1.0.

Nevermind, it seems CPU-Z and PC Wizard are reading data from the G400 card and not the actual motherboard chipset. I tried WCPUID and it reported the chipset as being AGP 1.0 @ 2x with sideband addressing enabled and a 64MB AGP aperture size (all is good 😎 ).

Reply 29 of 62, by gerwin

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
PowerPie5000 wrote:

Is the Soyo 6BA+ III one of the later BX boards? They probably fixed the AGP power issues with that one.

The Chipset was introduced in 1998, whilst I got that board in a new system in 2000. There was a Soyo 6BA+ IV too.

--> ISA Soundcard Overview // Doom MBF 2.04 // SetMul

Reply 30 of 62, by PowerPie5000

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
gerwin wrote:
PowerPie5000 wrote:

Is the Soyo 6BA+ III one of the later BX boards? They probably fixed the AGP power issues with that one.

The Chipset was introduced in 1998, whilst I got that board in a new system in 2000. There was a Soyo 6BA+ IV too.

It would most lilkely use the original C1 stepping 440BX from 1998 (i think there was only 1 version)... But i heard some manufacturers added better power circuitry for the AGP slot on later BX based boards. I think mine might actually be ok as it's the SE440BX2 and not the original/older SE440BX 😀

Reply 31 of 62, by PowerPie5000

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Bought a cheap 64MB Geforce 2 to try out 😀... It's either a GTS or Ultra (i'm leaning towards a reference ultra as it has green heatsinks all round). Ths should be a sufficient test for my motherboard. I won't count the voodoo5 as it uses external power and i'm not sure how power hungry an ATI Rage Fury Maxx is (which ran fine).

Reply 32 of 62, by shamino

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

Well I've been browsing this forum for a while and this topic pushed me over the edge to register. I love the 440BX, at one time every machine I built for family people had some version of that chipset. I finally retired the last one last month.

My first "real" 3D accelerator was a Hercules Geforce2 MX, for a Tyan S1590 Super Socket-7. That's a VIA MVP3 chipset with a nearly unusable impersonation of early AGP. I doubt it's anything beyond the earliest AGP spec (if that). It was difficult getting it to work, but ultimately it did and power was never a problem.
I do remember back then reading about people having AGP power problems on some boards, and that was in fact one of the reasons I decided to get the MX instead of an older higher power card like a TNT2 or whatever.
The stories claimed some motherboards had cut corners on the AGP power supply, not realizing how demanding video cards would soon become. I don't know if that's true, but maybe the early AGP spec is the real issue like you described. I'll admit, I'm afraid to try popping anything heavy in that old board.

HP Kayak 440GX: I ran the GF2MX and later a Geforce4 TI4200 128MB on this machine. This was a 1998 machine, but it came with a crazy big OpenGL card in it so power was probably ample to begin with.

Asus P2B-F rev1.00: Prob midlife BX or a bit later. I set up 2 of these, 1 with the Geforce2 MX and the other with the TI4200. I ran them overclocked at 133FSB, putting the AGP slot at 89MHz. Both cards and boards handled it perfectly, they were used about 2 years. NVidia cards of this period were good at handling 89MHz.

ABit BX133-RAID: definitely a late BX board, but FWIW, it ran an early Geforce3, again on an 89MHz AGP. No video issues, ran about 3 years.

Asus P2B in general: At one time I went through about 30-35 of these boards and resold them. I didn't use them extensively of course, but I did boot them into Memtest86, and also into a knoppix GUI. I probably used one of the Geforce cards for this but I don't remember for certain. The oldest boards were rev 1.02 which definitely had early parts/design, they were noticeably inferior to the later boards. I never ran into a P2B that had video issues, but 3D stress tests weren't on the agenda.

Asus P3B-F: I had 3-4 of these, same testing as the P2Bs.

Epox EP-BX3: this is probably a later BX board, but I've used it with numerous GF2-4 cards (including GF2 Ultra and TI4600) without issue. However, I didn't run them hard, so I can't claim to have pulled max power with it.

Reply 33 of 62, by shamino

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

relative power consumption:
I tested a bunch of video cards on the EP-BX3 a while back. I didn't test them under load, I was interested in total system idle power, which I tested at a knoppix desktop.
The power at the wall, with a Geforce2 MX, was 48.0W.
With a Geforce2 Ultra, it was 59.1W
With a Geforce3, it was 51.9W (so 7W less than a 2 Ultra)
With a GF4 Quadro (TI4600 based I think) it was 63.3W.
Can't compare to an FX5200, I didn't test any. I'm not sure if I have one that works.

I think the TI4200 (and it's bigger brothers) is a 3.3v guzzler. I ruined a more modern 550W power supply with that card. Like many modern PSUs, it was strong on 12V but weak on 3.3V. An older board with the TI4200 killed the 3.3V rail after a couple weeks of use. That's the only system that ever ruined one of those power supplies, I've used them successfully on many newer machines.

Reply 34 of 62, by PowerPie5000

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
shamino wrote:
relative power consumption: I tested a bunch of video cards on the EP-BX3 a while back. I didn't test them under load, I was int […]
Show full quote

relative power consumption:
I tested a bunch of video cards on the EP-BX3 a while back. I didn't test them under load, I was interested in total system idle power, which I tested at a knoppix desktop.
The power at the wall, with a Geforce2 MX, was 48.0W.
With a Geforce2 Ultra, it was 59.1W
With a Geforce3, it was 51.9W (so 7W less than a 2 Ultra)
With a GF4 Quadro (TI4600 based I think) it was 63.3W.
Can't compare to an FX5200, I didn't test any. I'm not sure if I have one that works.

Thanks for the info 😎... From those figures, i'm going to guess a GF2 Ultra consumes around 15W of power as nVidia thinks the GF2 MX is a 4W card and the GF2 GTS is 8W (compared to 16W for the older Geforce 256 DDR).

My PSU is fairly low wattge at only 200W, but it's a good quality Seasonic unit with a decent number of amps on each rail (had no issues with a Voodoo5 5500 or Rage Fury Maxx with Voodoo2 SLI). I do have another PSU in case the Seasonic craps outa... It's a 300W Mercury which is not a great brand, but the specs are a bit better than the Seasonic (not sure about the quality of the components used though).

Reply 35 of 62, by swaaye

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

I pulled a 200W out of a Dell Pentium4 "Northwood" PC which had a loadout of 1x HDD, 2x optical, a GF2MX, a big video capture card, and a modem. 200W gets you pretty far if it's decent quality.

Though down at that power level you need to be aware of whether the PSU is 5v or 12v focused. For example, with an early Athlon you want >20A on 5v. Later Athlons are ATX12V though. Intel P2/P3/Celeron don't use as much power as Athlon/Duron.

Reply 36 of 62, by PowerPie5000

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
swaaye wrote:

I pulled a 200W out of a Dell Pentium4 "Northwood" PC which had a loadout of 1x HDD, 2x optical, a GF2MX, a big video capture card, and a modem. 200W gets you pretty far if it's decent quality.

Though down at that power level you need to be aware of whether the PSU is 5v or 12v focused. For example, with an early Athlon you want >20A on 5v. Later Athlons are ATX12V though. Intel P2/P3/Celeron don't use as much power as Athlon/Duron.

At one point my 200W Seasonic PSU was powering:

Pentium III 650E (slot-1)
Intel SE440BX-2 Motherboard
384MB Kingston PC133 RAM (3 x 128MB@100MHz)
64MB ATI Rage Fury Maxx AGP (dual GPU graphics)
2 x 12MB Voodoo2 PCI in SLI
40GB Maxtor IDE HDD
Pioneer (or Toshiba) DVD/RW optical drive

... I'm hoping it will be ok with a 64MB GF2 GTS/Ultra as i'm pretty sure the Rage Fury Maxx would have been a bit power hungry.

Reply 37 of 62, by northernosprey02

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

And I am wondering about video card compatibility on 440BX. When I install Matrox G400 from HP Vectra VL600 to my ASUS P2B-F, it won't boot. What is the problem.

I think FX5200 was suck when installed on old hardware, DX9 on PII/PIII was not sense for me.

Reply 38 of 62, by m1919

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
northernosprey02 wrote:

And I am wondering about video card compatibility on 440BX. When I install Matrox G400 from HP Vectra VL600 to my ASUS P2B-F, it won't boot. What is the problem.

I think FX5200 was suck when installed on old hardware, DX9 on PII/PIII was not sense for me.

The FX5200 sucks on any hardware. The only FX cards that were half-way decent were the 5900 Ultra and 5950 Ultra.

Crimson Tide - EVGA 1000P2; ASUS Z10PE-D8 WS; 2x E5-2697 v3 14C 3.8 GHz on all cores (All core hack); 64GB Samsung DDR4-2133 ECC
EVGA 1080 Ti FTW3; EVGA 750 Ti SC; Sound Blaster Z