Radeon's relatively easy considering the confusion of the earlier Rage and Xpert@ branding (and it certainly doesn't end there either)

leileilol wrote:

Radeon's relatively easy considering the confusion of the earlier Rage and Xpert@ branding (and it certainly doesn't end there either)

Yes that's exactly what I'm talking about. It took me a while to find a "proper" Rage 128 Pro. They go under the name of Fury and Xpert@ and all sorts of other terms.

Then Rage6, but also Radeon DDR...

The All-in-Wonder cards are even worse. It was not until recently that I realized that my old 32mb cards were actually Radeon 7200 DDR's. The all in wonders all use the same Rage Theater chip from the Rage days so it was challenging even figuring out if my cards were SDR or DDR. Let alone what gen they were.

I usually go for PCI VENDOR / DEVICE / SUB IDs. Then adding memory/core clock rates, memory bus width and type. Then I just look up in tables which card it is.

Yes. I wish sellers would go through the effort and do that 😀

Haha, I have the same problem.
My collection of early nvidia is quite good, so I'm trying to get the ATIs now.
But since I have no idea what sellers sell, nor how to find the actual card I'm looking for, the progress on that front is more or less stalled.

Glad to see that I'm not alone 😊

Nvidia is indeed quite straight forward.

What GPU ID tools are available for Windows 98? I use PowerStrip often, it shows the clocks but nothing about the core configuration. I tried an older version of GPU-Z but it crashed with an error, I think it was missing a DLL.

Powerstrip's great. It even id's weird laptop gpus well and even PowerVR PCX cards

It's also great for v-sync control. The Matrox provided tool for example doesn't work for me, but PowerStrip works.

ODwilly wrote:

The All-in-Wonder cards are even worse. It was not until recently that I realized that my old 32mb cards were actually Radeon 7200 DDR's. The all in wonders all use the same Rage Theater chip from the Rage days so it was challenging even figuring out if my cards were SDR or DDR. Let alone what gen they were.

You do realize the Theatre is not a graphics chip communicating with memory?

PhilsComputerLab wrote:

Glad to see that I'm not alone 😊

Nvidia is indeed quite straight forward.

Not when it came to the 8xxx and 9xxx series though.
640MB 8800gts being weaker than a 512MB 8800gts is a good example.

PhilsComputerLab wrote:

Glad to see that I'm not alone 😊

Nvidia is indeed quite straight forward.

What GPU ID tools are available for Windows 98? I use PowerStrip often, it shows the clocks but nothing about the core configuration. I tried an older version of GPU-Z but it crashed with an error, I think it was missing a DLL.

Only AIDA64. Work in W98 and can identify a lot of cards. Still some minor models not and they do not seem to want to update them (too old, i asked them). Still can do much more than GPU-Z. GPU-Z is Win XP/ATI/Nvidia/Modern Intel only - it has no detection of Matrox or S3 cards and showing bad memory clocks for SDR cards for example. Also new versions freeze (use 0.7 or older) when used on older cards like GF 4MX and similar. Autor dont support also anything older than year 2000 (with few exceptions like Riva TNT).

http://www.aida64.com/downloads

Sounds good, I think I have that program on my file server, will check it out for sure.

The Rage 128 Pro quite impressed me when I benchmarked it recently. The 16 bit image quality is a bit poor, but the card really shines at 32 bits, it loses much less performance than the other cards.

Putas wrote:

ODwilly wrote:

The All-in-Wonder cards are even worse. It was not until recently that I realized that my old 32mb cards were actually Radeon 7200 DDR's. The all in wonders all use the same Rage Theater chip from the Rage days so it was challenging even figuring out if my cards were SDR or DDR. Let alone what gen they were.

You do realize the Theatre is not a graphics chip communicating with memory?

Yep, but seeing as how the 7000 series cards look identical to the 8000 series it was difficult to figure out what drivers were the proper drivers, back then I knew nothing about CPU-Z or Powerstrip or anything like that. Combining the words "Radeon" and "Rage Theater" and 32mb made for some confusing google searches.

Yea it doesn't help that's for sure.

Does anyone else feel that Rage is a better name that Radeon?

Rage Fury sounds pretty decent. Radeon reminds me of...

Nvidia's got a worse problem.

Munx wrote:

PhilsComputerLab wrote:

Glad to see that I'm not alone 😊

Nvidia is indeed quite straight forward.

Not when it came to the 8xxx and 9xxx series though.
640MB 8800gts being weaker than a 512MB 8800gts is a good example.

It wasn't that bad and back then one could have done a google search then found out which was what unlike some of the older ATI cards. Geforce 9 series was straight forward unlike some of the rebrands that came later when you had low end Fermi cards when everything else was Kepler ect.

leileilol wrote:

Nvidia's got a worse problem. […]
Show full quote

Nvidia's got a worse problem.

Now lets hope Nvidia does not see this post and decide to adopt new mascots for their next gen graphics cards 😵