What is really going on ?

I've been working with CAD video cards for
years, and the best card I ever used was
the Matrox G450 / 550. Last year I built
up an AMD 2000+ with the G450 and a gig
of ram. I've also been a gamer, but not
a die-hard, but Doom, Wolfenstein ...
Then I bought Medal Of Honor: Allied
Assault. Nice game until I reached the
Snow Fields episodes. My G450 bogged down
to about 1 frame per sec, and the game
became difficult to play, but I finally
got through it. I bought MOHAA: SPEARHEAD,
and that was even worse .. impossible to
get past one of the early episodes. I
figured the problem was EA GAMES, and
just forgot about it for a year, until
I started getting complaints about video
problems in my CAD labs .. Solidworks,
AutoCAD. In looking for an answer, I
bought on sale an ATI RADEON 128 9000
PRO for my home computer, and an ATI
9200 for my work computer. I had bench
tested the G450 ( 3DMARK01 ) at 1050,
and now the ATI cards at 6668, 7448
.... a gain of ?? 6 or 7 times in
performance .. BUUULOOONNY ! The change
in MOHAA and MOHAA: SPEARHEAD shows a
gain in screen performance of more than
100x Both games became highly playable,
and I went through them fine. Also, I
had much better looking video and more
sound effects. Right away, I see bench
marks mean nothing. I've no doubt that
these modern CAD packages are also moving
in the direction of the newer video
standards. How the heck does one judge
these standards outside of the gaming
industry ? Also, is there a (war) game
that will kick my ATI 9000 in the butt?
I want to test it. And, when in the hell
is DOOMIII coming out ?? I know that is
going to push video standards again.

johns

Also, is there a (war) game
that will kick my ATI 9000 in the butt?
I want to test it. And, when in the hell
is DOOMIII coming out ?? I know that is
going to push video standards again.

johns


For now, there's Battlefield 1942. I personally wouldn't buy the
expansion packs if I knew then how small they were, and there's a
decent foundation in the mod comunity for it. Not sure about DoomIII
Though.




You should start drinking prune juice and KY jelly cocktails right now,
that will make things a lot smoother.
-Felatio Love

if you like MoH then you have to try Call of Duty
but dont worry about Doom 3 cause it wont be out for a while and will
probably require a 9500 or higher to run it decently.

"johns" wrote in message
...

I've been working with CAD video cards for
years, and the best card I ever used was
the Matrox G450 / 550. Last year I built
up an AMD 2000+ with the G450 and a gig
of ram. I've also been a gamer, but not
a die-hard, but Doom, Wolfenstein ...
Then I bought Medal Of Honor: Allied
Assault. Nice game until I reached the
Snow Fields episodes. My G450 bogged down
to about 1 frame per sec, and the game
became difficult to play, but I finally
got through it. I bought MOHAA: SPEARHEAD,
and that was even worse .. impossible to
get past one of the early episodes. I
figured the problem was EA GAMES, and
just forgot about it for a year, until
I started getting complaints about video
problems in my CAD labs .. Solidworks,
AutoCAD. In looking for an answer, I
bought on sale an ATI RADEON 128 9000
PRO for my home computer, and an ATI
9200 for my work computer. I had bench
tested the G450 ( 3DMARK01 ) at 1050,
and now the ATI cards at 6668, 7448
... a gain of ?? 6 or 7 times in
performance .. BUUULOOONNY ! The change
in MOHAA and MOHAA: SPEARHEAD shows a
gain in screen performance of more than
100x Both games became highly playable,
and I went through them fine. Also, I
had much better looking video and more
sound effects. Right away, I see bench
marks mean nothing. I've no doubt that
these modern CAD packages are also moving
in the direction of the newer video
standards. How the heck does one judge
these standards outside of the gaming
industry ? Also, is there a (war) game
that will kick my ATI 9000 in the butt?
I want to test it. And, when in the hell
is DOOMIII coming out ?? I know that is
going to push video standards again.

johns

Your text formatting is odd... Unless your work has some limitations,
please reset to defaults with OutlookExpress (Worlds worst
Newsreader).

On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 15:55:15 -0800, "johns"
wrote:


I've been working with CAD video cards for
years, and the best card I ever used was
the Matrox G450 / 550. Last year I built

Good "OLD" cards... they haven't changed in 4 years. Very stable,
since they never changed.

up an AMD 2000+ with the G450 and a gig
of ram. I've also been a gamer, but not
a die-hard, but Doom, Wolfenstein ...

1993~1995 games.

Then I bought Medal Of Honor: Allied
Assault. Nice game until I reached the
Snow Fields episodes. My G450 bogged down
to about 1 frame per sec, and the game

ugh...

I started getting complaints about video
problems in my CAD labs .. Solidworks,
AutoCAD. In looking for an answer, I
bought on sale an ATI RADEON 128 9000
PRO for my home computer, and an ATI
9200 for my work computer. I had bench
tested the G450 ( 3DMARK01 ) at 1050,
and now the ATI cards at 6668, 7448
... a gain of ?? 6 or 7 times in
performance .. BUUULOOONNY !

What do you mean? You're talking a few generations difference in
performance and driver advancedment. Matrox built their business on
making BUSINESS cards with rock-solid drivers... they attempted to
moderize their 3D graphics with the Pallara whatever, a $500 video
card that is about the same speed as your ATI9000Pro.

Thing is... (whisper) The 9000/9200 are bottom-end video cards, based
off of a 2+ year old graphic chip design. They are considered
sub-standard for modern gaming. MOH is an okay game, Call Of Duty is
much nicer... both of these are OLD game engine tech games.

Try out UT2003 / Unreal2 (About $15~20), it'll bog down the 9000...
but has about 10x the detail of MOH/COD.

marks mean nothing. I've no doubt that
these modern CAD packages are also moving
in the direction of the newer video
standards. How the heck does one judge
these standards outside of the gaming
industry ?

Gaming folks are hardest on cards... but read this anyways:
http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic...229/index.html
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=1955

Also, is there a (war) game
that will kick my ATI 9000 in the butt?
I want to test it. And, when in the hell
is DOOMIII coming out ?? I know that is
going to push video standards again.

UT2003 is a bit tough... but for MODERN cards (9600Pro and above),
its Half Life2 and Doom3 we're waiting for.

We tend to call them shooters... When the new games come out, the
WWII games will also be updated too...

For about $150~250, you can have a very good video card.




--
Remember when real men used Real computers!?
When 512K of video RAM was a lot!

Death to Palladium & WPA!!

Your text formatting is odd... Unless your work has some limitations,
please reset to defaults with OutlookExpress (Worlds worst
Newsreader).

Habit I got into using Pine :-(

Good "OLD" cards... they haven't changed in 4 years. Very stable,
since they never changed.

And the G450 is still the only card that has passed all
the Solidworks video tests ??? The ATIs in general
have little issues in CAD. I'm trying to get up to speed
for the next generation of CAD in our labs, and clearly
I'm not there.

What do you mean? You're talking a few generations difference in
performance and driver advancedment. Matrox built their business on
making BUSINESS cards with rock-solid drivers... they attempted to
moderize their 3D graphics with the Pallara whatever, a $500 video
card that is about the same speed as your ATI9000Pro.

Exactly. I hesitate to buy 100+ Matrox cards when I
can probably get by with ATI 9200s at $70 each, and
maybe even anticipate what the Engineering community
is doing in presentation graphics. I just don't know, and
they have no real way of testing their needs. The gaming
community is the only way I see to go for now.

Thing is... (whisper) The 9000/9200 are bottom-end video cards, based
off of a 2+ year old graphic chip design. They are considered
sub-standard for modern gaming. MOH is an okay game, Call Of Duty is
much nicer... both of these are OLD game engine tech games.

To me, right now, I was flabbergasted at their performance.

Try out UT2003 / Unreal2 (About $15~20), it'll bog down the 9000...
but has about 10x the detail of MOH/COD.

I'll do it.

We tend to call them shooters... When the new games come out, the
WWII games will also be updated too...

MOHAA: PACIFIC ASSAULT maybe. I hope so. I like the
games I have ... but I see CoD on the shelves all the time.
See if I can get a better deal than the local Gaming Shop.

johns

Try out UT2003 / Unreal2 (About $15~20), it'll bog down the 9000...
but has about 10x the detail of MOH/COD.

Yuk! Just tried it. UT is a Kung-fooey between robots. I've
just can't do something that reminds me of a game-parlor
no matter how detailed it is. Also, dl'd Battlefield 1942
demo. Hope the game is better than the demo. It claimed
to have detail, but it was just another multiplayer running
around a place shooting each other. Detail was crap
compared to MOHAA. It was about the level of early
QUAKE with no real mouse function suitable to good
control in a war game. You've gotta move forward on
mouse2 and that is all there is to that. This thing was all
keybd with a little mouse add-on. Really old and too
self absorbed with spawn-points and other nonsense.
Seems there's two kinds of games out .. the ??-box
PC adaptions with crappy controls on the keybd ..
and the Wolfenstein war games that have an adult theme
and well thought out controls. I can see these differences
moving into the CAD packages too. Wouldn't that make
your day to spend couple hours on a Solidworks design
and have Solidworks totally sack your video and desktop
settings when you quit.

johns

In article , says...


snip

Exactly. I hesitate to buy 100+ Matrox cards when I
can probably get by with ATI 9200s at $70 each, and
maybe even anticipate what the Engineering community
is doing in presentation graphics. I just don't know, and
they have no real way of testing their needs. The gaming
community is the only way I see to go for now.


snip

More money, but newer technology. Have you looked at:

http://www.ati.com/products/fireglt2-128/index.html ?

Bill

Exactly what I was going to say. Look at FireGL cards, (or Nvidia's
QuadroFX) they for cad and other office use.
Now they be real expensive (compaired to gaming counterpart), but some
people have modded gaming cards to Business cards.. I remember Nvidia5900 -
Quadro FX5900..

"Bill" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...


snip

Exactly. I hesitate to buy 100+ Matrox cards when I
can probably get by with ATI 9200s at $70 each, and
maybe even anticipate what the Engineering community
is doing in presentation graphics. I just don't know, and
they have no real way of testing their needs. The gaming
community is the only way I see to go for now.


snip

More money, but newer technology. Have you looked at:

http://www.ati.com/products/fireglt2-128/index.html ?

Bill

On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 11:54:31 -0800, "johns"
wrote:


Try out UT2003 / Unreal2 (About $15~20), it'll bog down the 9000...
but has about 10x the detail of MOH/COD.

Yuk! Just tried it. UT is a Kung-fooey between robots. I've
just can't do something that reminds me of a game-parlor
no matter how detailed it is. Also, dl'd Battlefield 1942
demo. Hope the game is better than the demo. It claimed

Nope... 1942 gets no better. dont waste your time on it.

and well thought out controls. I can see these differences
moving into the CAD packages too. Wouldn't that make
your day to spend couple hours on a Solidworks design
and have Solidworks totally sack your video and desktop
settings when you quit.


Sign of some sloppy programming... I use ProDesktop, its far more
functional than CAD (unless perhaps you're CAD projects are
buildings). There, you build in real time 3D.

They used to have their software for FREE download (no support) but it
sells for $1000+ ~ 100,000 depending on features and licences.
(IE: You can build products with it, but it won't allow you to
communicate with the hardware for manufacture).

http://www.ptc.com/products/proe/wildfire/2dto3d.htm

Or he
http://www.ptc.com/appserver/it/icm/...e=en& tab=try

They ended on 2004, the FREE use version... which I still have mine


--
Remember when real men used Real computers!?
When 512K of video RAM was a lot!

Death to Palladium & WPA!!

On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 11:54:31 -0800, "johns"
wrote:


Try out UT2003 / Unreal2 (About $15~20), it'll bog down the 9000...
but has about 10x the detail of MOH/COD.

Yuk! Just tried it. UT is a Kung-fooey between robots. I've
just can't do something that reminds me of a game-parlor

Crap! I hit the SEND button before I finished!!!

Hey now!! They are not Kung-fu robots. They are people in battle
armor, some in skimpy outfits, big aliens, cyborgs and 1 class of
robots. There is no hand to hand combat... strickly shooting.

It is ABOUT eye-candy yes... but you asked for something that'll push
you card....

Look at these screen shots. (you'll need to change the last 2 digits
to see other images).
http://www.gamespy.com/asp/image.asp...t2004pc/01.jpg

And for the review:
http://www.gamespy.com/previews/february04/ut2004pc/



--
Remember when real men used Real computers!?
When 512K of video RAM was a lot!

Death to Palladium & WPA!!