Via Deltachrome9 IGP Question

Can anyone tell me if the integrated video, Via DeltaChrome9 IGP, on
the Asus A8V-VM motherboard, is an AGP type?

What Nvidia video card is equivalent to the DeltaChrome9 IGP display
on this motherboard.

I'm new to integrated video on a MB, and am trying to determine if a
lower priced PCI Express card would improve the graphics on my PC.

If a noticeable improvement could be realized, please suggest an
nvidia card to upgrade the display.

I play very few games so don't need an expensive upgrade.

Thanks for suggestions.

wrote:
Can anyone tell me if the integrated video, Via DeltaChrome9 IGP, on
the Asus A8V-VM motherboard, is an AGP type?

What Nvidia video card is equivalent to the DeltaChrome9 IGP display
on this motherboard.

I'm new to integrated video on a MB, and am trying to determine if a
lower priced PCI Express card would improve the graphics on my PC.

If a noticeable improvement could be realized, please suggest an
nvidia card to upgrade the display.

I play very few games so don't need an expensive upgrade.

Thanks for suggestions.



The board appears to be PCI Express based, with an x16 slot
intended for video.

Virtually any PCI Express video card you buy, will perform faster
than the VIA chipset graphics. But faster in the 3D end of things,
as with 2D, there shouldn't be much of a difference. Review sites
have stopped testing 2D performance, and nobody does "scroll tests"
any more, to differentiate 2D performance.

So even a $50 card will improve performance, or give you more advanced
hardware support (DirectX9 features for gaming etc).

Maybe the first question we should be asking, is how are
the graphics deficient in your eyes ? What problems are
you running into ? The built-in graphics do use system memory,
which is bad if you don't have a lot of system memory to
begin with.

Paul

On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 22:01:49 -0500, Paul wrote:



The board appears to be PCI Express based, with an x16 slot
intended for video.

Virtually any PCI Express video card you buy, will perform faster
than the VIA chipset graphics. But faster in the 3D end of things,
as with 2D, there shouldn't be much of a difference. Review sites
have stopped testing 2D performance, and nobody does "scroll tests"
any more, to differentiate 2D performance.

So even a $50 card will improve performance, or give you more advanced
hardware support (DirectX9 features for gaming etc).

Maybe the first question we should be asking, is how are
the graphics deficient in your eyes ? What problems are
you running into ? The built-in graphics do use system memory,
which is bad if you don't have a lot of system memory to
begin with.

Paul

Thanks for your response.

My main concern is, when I visit a web page with graphics, it's a
little slow showing the entire picture. Kind of starts at the top and
scrolls to the bottom.

The only video cards I have, to compare it to, are GeForce 2, MX200
and FX-5200. Both of these seem a lot faster than the onboard video.

Since I'm not a gamer, I haven't played any, yet.

I've never used a PSI-e video card and didn't know if a lower priced
card, $40 - $50, would be an improve.

Any suggestion is appreciated.

wrote:
On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 22:01:49 -0500, Paul wrote:


The board appears to be PCI Express based, with an x16 slot
intended for video.

Virtually any PCI Express video card you buy, will perform faster
than the VIA chipset graphics. But faster in the 3D end of things,
as with 2D, there shouldn't be much of a difference. Review sites
have stopped testing 2D performance, and nobody does "scroll tests"
any more, to differentiate 2D performance.

So even a $50 card will improve performance, or give you more advanced
hardware support (DirectX9 features for gaming etc).

Maybe the first question we should be asking, is how are
the graphics deficient in your eyes ? What problems are
you running into ? The built-in graphics do use system memory,
which is bad if you don't have a lot of system memory to
begin with.

Paul

Thanks for your response.

My main concern is, when I visit a web page with graphics, it's a
little slow showing the entire picture. Kind of starts at the top and
scrolls to the bottom.

The only video cards I have, to compare it to, are GeForce 2, MX200
and FX-5200. Both of these seem a lot faster than the onboard video.

Since I'm not a gamer, I haven't played any, yet.

I've never used a PSI-e video card and didn't know if a lower priced
card, $40 - $50, would be an improve.

Any suggestion is appreciated.

I guess my immediate reaction is "that isn't normal". And it might not
be a video problem, but something else. The question is, will randomly
replacing the video, fix it ? There are some benchmarks you could run,
but the problem is, finding someone with an identical system, to compare
them to. So I don't really know where to start.

There aren't a lot of posts on the Asus hosted forum for your board.
http://vip.asus.com/forum/view.aspx?...Language=en-us

If you want a video card, this one has a full set of connectors,
and is $69 (7300GT).

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814130052

How much memory is in this system and how many sticks/size each ?

What does CPUZ report ? Do all the numbers look normal for
clocks and the like ?

http://www.cpuid.com/cpuz.php

And did you actually install a video driver for the built-in video ?
I see a couple on the support.asus.com download page, and the first
one is a very recent release. Your motherboard CD should have had
an option to install a video driver as well, if you don't want to
download one of these.

Beta Version 6.14.10.0071 2007/01/11 update
OS Win2K / WinXP
Description VIA S3G Display Driver V6.14.10.0075 for Windows 2000/XP.
File Size 8.8 (MBytes)

Version 10.50.0.125 2006/01/09 update
OS Win2K / WinXP / Win2003
Description VIA Onboard VGA Driver for Windows 2000/XP/XP MCE/2003
File Size 10.92 (MBytes)

Paul

On-board video chips are soldered on the motherboard. They are NOT AGP or
PCI types. You will have to open the computer to see if you have an AGP
slot included on that motherboard.

--
DaveW

----------------
wrote in message
...
Can anyone tell me if the integrated video, Via DeltaChrome9 IGP, on
the Asus A8V-VM motherboard, is an AGP type?

What Nvidia video card is equivalent to the DeltaChrome9 IGP display
on this motherboard.

I'm new to integrated video on a MB, and am trying to determine if a
lower priced PCI Express card would improve the graphics on my PC.

If a noticeable improvement could be realized, please suggest an
nvidia card to upgrade the display.

I play very few games so don't need an expensive upgrade.

Thanks for suggestions.

But they do use either an AGP or PCIe bus, even though they are not in a
"slot".

Dan

DaveW wrote:
On-board video chips are soldered on the motherboard. They are NOT
AGP or PCI types. You will have to open the computer to see if you
have an AGP slot included on that motherboard.


----------------
wrote in message
...
Can anyone tell me if the integrated video, Via DeltaChrome9 IGP, on
the Asus A8V-VM motherboard, is an AGP type?

What Nvidia video card is equivalent to the DeltaChrome9 IGP display
on this motherboard.

I'm new to integrated video on a MB, and am trying to determine if a
lower priced PCI Express card would improve the graphics on my PC.

If a noticeable improvement could be realized, please suggest an
nvidia card to upgrade the display.

I play very few games so don't need an expensive upgrade.

Thanks for suggestions.

On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 11:16:42 -0500, Paul wrote:


I guess my immediate reaction is "that isn't normal". And it might not
be a video problem, but something else. The question is, will randomly
replacing the video, fix it ? There are some benchmarks you could run,
but the problem is, finding someone with an identical system, to compare
them to. So I don't really know where to start.

There aren't a lot of posts on the Asus hosted forum for your board.
http://vip.asus.com/forum/view.aspx?...Language=en-us

If you want a video card, this one has a full set of connectors,
and is $69 (7300GT).

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814130052

I'll check that out.

How much memory is in this system and how many sticks/size each ?

Two 128 MB sticks. Actually, I think I've found the problem. I had
allocated only 64 MB to the video. When I increased the size to 128
MB, the video is loading like it should. I also have purchased more
memory, which should improve overall performance.

What does CPUZ report ? Do all the numbers look normal for
clocks and the like ?

http://www.cpuid.com/cpuz.php

And did you actually install a video driver for the built-in video ?

Yes. I installed the driver provided on the MB installation CD.

I see a couple on the support.asus.com download page, and the first
one is a very recent release. Your motherboard CD should have had
an option to install a video driver as well, if you don't want to
download one of these.

Beta Version 6.14.10.0071 2007/01/11 update
OS Win2K / WinXP
Description VIA S3G Display Driver V6.14.10.0075 for Windows 2000/XP.
File Size 8.8 (MBytes)

Version 10.50.0.125 2006/01/09 update
OS Win2K / WinXP / Win2003
Description VIA Onboard VGA Driver for Windows 2000/XP/XP MCE/2003
File Size 10.92 (MBytes)

Paul


The onboard video does provide ActiveX 9.0 support, so I think it will
be fine, when I add more memory.

Thanks, so very much, for your help.