Kyro 2 the killer of nvidia ???

Page 18 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
G

Guest

Guest
OK just did a little searching to satisfy my own curiosity... This thread is number one in both number of views and number of replies. The top three go like this:

Views/Replies
1st - 3593/425 (this post, by powervr2)
2nd - 2824/140 (leaked NV20 specs! impressive!, by aceman10c)
3rd - 1721/138 (Say what you want -- ATi -– Rules, by rcf84)

Cheers,
Warden
 
G

Guest

Guest
:)
cool thanks warden...

there will be something from <A HREF="http://www.aceshardware.com/" target="_new">http://www.aceshardware.com/</A> this week !!

<font color=blue>
"So where is our videochip guide? It is nearly complete, as we're wrapping up the final analysis now, and we expect it will be published this week. The chipsets in this guide are the Radeon, Geforce 2 GTS, Geforce 2 MX, TNT2, Kyro II and of course Geforce 3.

Although you can read already a lot about these chips on the web, I think we will still be able to offer you some new and fresh information. For example, we managed to overclock a Radeon up to 225 MHz, which should give you a taste of the upcoming Radeon SE (at 230 MHz) will be like. The Kyro II overclocked to 184 MHz and ... Stay tuned!
"</font color=blue>

anandtech will make a second review on kyro 2 in 2 week time...

he makes the following statement :
<font color=green>
"The Kyro II, meanwhile, appears to be a great gaming card from what our initial tests have shown, outperforming the GeForce2 Ultra in some cases. However, its still not available and thus not eligible yet for the buyer's guide. We are also hoping to do some more testing with the board before we make a strong recommendation to buy it, so hang on tight for a second look at the Kyro II in the next couple of weeks. If everything goes well, the Kyro II will more than likely replace the GeForce2 MX as the budget gaming card of choice. "</font color=green>

let see if kyro 2 is really a good card...
 
G

Guest

Guest
Hey powervr2, your posts are making sense, your sentences are readable and you are even using color! Congrats man! :cool: All joking aside, I know I raked on you pretty hard in this thread about putting time and thought into your posts, and I have noticed on the last couple pages that your posts have been much improved. You have presented your arguments much more clearly and have had more research to back them up. I, and I am sure many others, really appreciate this.

Regards,
Warden
 

HolyGrenade

Distinguished
Feb 8, 2001
3,359
0
20,780
0
He even apologised to me for his temprory lapse of judgement. An almost all new powervr2!



<font color=red>"My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and dispair!"</font color=red><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by holygrenade on 04/25/01 12:15 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
 
G

Guest

Guest
It looks like we've both made mistakes and misinterpreted each other then :smile: .

When I said that performance would gain it acceptance I was saying that overall its the most important thing. Because your comment seemed to say that polotics was the most important thing, which IMO it isn't. Its always a very large factor in the 3d card industry, although as I say its not as large a factor when both technologies are 100% compatible. But if it was always the most important thing then the underdog would never win and of course we know that sometimes they do. Look at Nvidia and 3DFX, once Nvidia was a little underdog and they overthrew 3dfx because they made cards with unsarpass performance. Yes they used allot of politics too but that was only latter when they'd already gotten very big. It didn't matter that 3dfx had most of the developers on there side for a long time because the performance and regular product cycles shone threw in the end. If IMGTEC bring out PowerVR 4 in 4-5 months and its a tile based renderer with 4 pixel pipes, 2 TU's per pipe running at 250mhz with 250mhz DDR ram and full DX8 compliency it'd be over 200% faster then the Kyro II, it would walk all over the Geforce 3 and it would be THE card to have no matter which company its from or what rendering method it uses or if Nvidia try to wreck it. Because in the end what looks the best in reviews and is cheapest is going to get all the customers.

Also something to the Kyro II's advantage it 3dfx going down. Think about all the voodoo3 owners and even Voodoo5 owners out there that will be looking for a new card. If they have a Kyro II, Radeon DDR, or a Geforce 2 GTS to choose from which are they going to pick?, the company that put there beloved 3dfx out of business?....not in a million years. Most of those people will go for either Radeon or Kyro II if there upgrading now and looking at any review Kyro II has a distinct advantage over the Radeon DDR even though it doesn't have HW T&L it still outperforms it easily at 1024x768x32 and above.

<<<<<Last thing and it's about the NVIDIA flames: It's your right to flame them and it's my right to call it whining. It's nothing personal on my part. I also don't really care if you flame some company. My main gripe is this: when considering the ethics of modern corporations, I think, sadly, that "guilty until proven innocent" fits much better. I get really tired of seeing NVIDIA made out as the bad guy compared to other companies when those companies almost undoubtedly do the same things, or would if they were in the position to. The fact that the press has not caught them yet is not, in my book, proof enough that the other big players aren't just as bad.>>>>>

Well IMO you can only report or complain about what you see. If you assume that every company does exactly the same then your assuming to much. For instance I have a website (suprise it s PowerVR site: http://www.powervr.org.uk) and I have recieved free review cards from PowerVR (I also get all the newest press drivers and software like the Temples demo and stuff). Dealing with IMGTEC is great so far, there a truly lovely company AFAICS. Look at some of the reports you can find from some sites who just couldn't keep quite anymore about what Nvidia have done to them after recieving Nvidia sample cards. Demanding they take down any links or articles about 3dfx and similar stuff, almost as if they think they now own a site just because they give someone a free sample card. I know for sure that IMGTEC don't do things like this because they've never asked anything like that of me and never tried to put any pressure on me to do anything in any specific way. Granted I'm already a PowerVR fansite but I'm sure I still sometimes do things they don't like. So I won't assume there as unethical as Nvidia until I see it for myself or at least even here some rumours that might put a question mark over there it. Thats the only logical way of doing things IMO. OF course as I already said I wouldn't make the statement that IMGTEC are nice, and ATI are nice and Nvidia are bad because I don't know for sure that ATI or IMGTEC are nice (although IMGTEC are certainly very kind to me). But what I will certainly say is Nvidia are bad IMO and I have the info to prove it.

<<<<<By the way, I appreciate the fact that no matter how hard we have disagreed, you have always answered with facts and research, and not just shot off a bunch of baseless flames like many people do>>>>>

Thanks I also appretiate your intelligent posts.

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Teasy on 04/25/01 11:31 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Your sort of posts are exactly what makes good threads fall appart into post after post of flames, an example of some of your posts:

<<<<<I thought the Kyro II was supposed to do multitexturing and FSAA without any performance penalty. I C it was all bullshit.

Another great review of the Kyro in fast graphics! lol! it was in the bottom half of the cards the whole time! Even in the scaling. I thought it was supposed to be more scalable than the GeForce Cards! Ha!>>>>>

I get so irratated at people like you who have nothing to say and just say things like LOL and HA all the time and can't post a civil logical post if there lives depended on it. The Kyro II was never supposed to have free FSAA, where did you get that idea? What it does have is a more efficient method of FSAA. It uses the same actual implementation as Geforce or Radeon (OGSS) but its tile based rendering makes the process more efficient by not needing as much fillrate to downsample the scene and also not needing an oversizes frame or z buffer in ram.

<<<<<The bottomline is the Kyro 2 is a crap card. They've been failing from the beginning. The Kyro was a crap card. The neon was a super crap card. the pcx2 was crap and the pcx2 was again super crap.

It never managed to do anything against the competition of the same generation. No body calls the tnt2 a gaming card. a lot of the computers with the tnt cards go to big businesses. If you work then you will know, you do work on those computers. you don't play games on those.

If you bought a Geforce GTS instead of the Kyro, you wouldn't need to upgrade again. If you get the Kyro 2, you'll probably want to upgrade again straight away. you'll probably be better off with a ati rage 3d charger or something.

You try to show how good the kyro is by linking into the middle of reviews only to the bits that show the kyro 2 to be favourable. But most of us read the whole thing and find the kyro to be crap.

You were claiming the kyro 2 has no perfomance hits with fsaa or multitexturing, but it does. look at the reviews you posted your self like this one here.>>>>>

Ok so now I know your problem, you don't like Powervr2 (the person not the product). If this is the case then please do not bring the Kyro II into your posts just to try to annoy powervr2. I assume this is whats happening here because the statements you make here are frankly astonishingly ignorant to the point of being funny. I assume you are not stupid so you must be saying all this to piss powervr2 off. The Kyro II is not by any stretch of the imagination "crap" and as for yout comment about it being better to buy a rage3d well this was actually the comment that made me realise that you don't actually beleive what your saying (if you did you'd be crazy) you just don't like powervr2.

I have already explained in good detail about multi-texturing and I also explained about the FSAA technique (I think?) in ealier posts but if you'd like me to explain them again then just ask. But please stop making rediculess comments about the Kyro II.

Just one more example:

<<<<<<So it is all coming out. The Kyro loses performance when you turn on FSAA. Also slows down with multitexturing just like other cards. but it also has problems with dx8. lol!

so basically it is a tnt class card with tile based rendering that scores low to medium frame rates. lol!>>>>>

Again ludicrous comments and again full of unnecessary LOL's. Unless your a mad scientist all those LOL's really should be kept to a minimum.

Holygrenade:

<<<<<Lets see some benchmarks with the kyro showing valid competition against the high end nVidia cards (Gf2 Pro + Ultra, GF3? yeah right!!!) before you start making these claims.>>>>>

I wouldn't say the Kyro II is competition for these cards. But it certainly becomes a competitor at high res and high colour depth. If you want proof of that look at the Anandtech review, and there are others that show this. Lots of the reviews show the Kyro II without forcing TC (which gives it a 30-40% framerate boost at high res with trilinear filtering enabled), so there not really representative of what you'd get if you bought a Kyro II. I force TC with every game on my Kyro 1 and have had only 3 games with problems with forcing TC out of about 50-60 that I've played on the card and 1 of those games problems is now fixed. So forcing TC is something that should be done for benchmarks.

<<<<<<From a technology point of view, the kyro tries to deny the graphics in games from evolving.>>>>>>

Would you like to explain that one to me then?, its traditionals like the Geforce which stop graphics in games from evolving by limiting game design to pethetic narrow corridors and bare rooms because its too stupid to know what its rendering before it renders it.

<<<<<9 - 12 months... 'quite a while'? In my book that is a short period to have a graphics card. I've had my GeForce DDR since its launch. Now that is 'quite a while'.>>>>>

And how much did you pay for that Geforce DDR?....for the price of a Kyro II 12 months is a long time.

Noko:

<<<<<So some of my questions would be if ever a TBR video card will have good drivers with few problems.>>>>>

Were are the major problems with the drivers? I haven't seen many problems. The drivers are very stable and largely problem free. On your point about it being slower on a slower system this is again allot to do with the DX8 bug. In a game like Giants I lose 15fps with DX8 installed when advanced water effects and shadows are enabled. With DX7 installed I lose no speed. This shows that those features are using rendering into textures and DX8 is wrongly using the CPU to perform the calculations when the Kyro II can render into textures in HW. MS have admited its there fault and they'll fix it.

<<<<<<I am almost concluding unless you have a 1ghz system or greater then another video card especially with T&L would probably be better.>>>>>>

Yeah if your willing to play games as 800x600x16 then by all means get a MX, but its HW T&L unit will do nothing for its crippled mem bandwidth at higher res and colour depth.

Also all this about the MX being half the price of a Kyro II just isn't true. I keep mentioning this point but nobody seems to listen. The Kyro II 32mb is £85 here in the U.K. Now don't try to tell me that a 32mb Kyro II will sell in the U.S for more then it sells in the U.K because thats impossible, VAT see's to that. The Kyro II 32mb will be no more then $90 in the U.S. If you want to compare Kyro II prices against other cards in the U.S right now then compare the Herc 4500 against other 64mb cards like MX400. Then you can assume that with half the amount of ram both cards will keep the same price ratio against each other.

Also people seem to assume the Herc 4500 will sell online at reccomended price, this is not going to happen. If there not selling for $120 in some places a short time after release then I'll eat my own crap :smile:

OzzieBloke:

<<<<<The tile-based rendering of the Kyro is an important step forward in the right direction, I believe. If someone can properly implement full tile rendering, properly, combine it with a programmable vertex shader and T&L unit, put some on-board cache on the damn thing, THEN you will have a card worth singing the praises of. Whether this will be a future Kyro or Radeon or GeForce is to be seen.

Kyro II only misses HW T&L from your wish list and that is added in the next PowerVR card and thats a promise.

<<<<<Edit: Add to that, enough rendering pipelines such as the Kyro has done, and better methods to deal with overdraw so that coders don't have to fart around like a wombat on golden syrup trying to get games to run respectably.>>>>>

Have I misunderstood you here or do you think that the Kyro II doesn't get rid of 100% of overdraw?

Warden:

<<<<<<If you read his statement that you quoted, while remembering that he considers "over 9 - 12 months" to be "quite a while," then it puts a different light on things. I have said from the beginning that the Kyro II should do fine, for about the next year or so, but I consider that to be a short time between upgrades, not "quite a while." I want a card to last two years if I can get it to, and that has been my complaint all along: I don't think the Kyro II (or the GF2 MX or the Voodoo 5) will be good for more than a year. The GF2 GTS and above won't run games with all the DX8 effects, but I think they will still be perfectly usable.>>>>>>>

No card you buy right now is going to last 2 years because of DX8 titles. IMO the best thing to do it buy a Kyro II now for a very cheap price (in 2 weeks when its out anyway) and then you can save money and have your pick of DX8 cards in 12 months.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Well finally Tom's Kyro II review is out. Although Tom didn't do it himself. Obviously he couldn't find enough problems with the card and so left the job of showing it in a fair light to someone else :smile:

There are a few inaccuracies. The most noticable innaccuracy is when he says that the Kyro II doesn't have Win NT and 2k drivers. This isn't true as you can see from this driver download page: http://www.powervr.com/downloads/Drivers.htm (they say Kyro, but there Kyro 1 and Kyro II drivers like Nvidia's unified drivers). Although he probably meant that there are no Hercules Kyro II NT and W2k drivers but then who needs them. The Kyro II reference drivers that the Hercules drivers are based on are just the same (only the pics shown in the options are different). Just as everyone uses the Nvidia reference drivers anyone buying a Kyro II will use the IMGTEC reference drivers most of the time. So I feel the reviewer should have mentioned that Kyro II ref drivers are available for Win98, Win2k and WinNT. Because people might get the wrong idea and think that the Kyro II only has Win98 drivers.

Also if you look at that page you'll notice that the drivers there are allot newer then the ones used in the review. I (as a member of the press) have had 4 new reference driver revisions since those that Tom's review used. So obviously Tom wasn't waiting for new drivers to fix problems before doing this review because if he had been waiting for new drivers the review would have used any one of the newer drivers released over the past month. The ones this review used were released over a month ago (22nd of March). And if they only wanted to use Herc drivers I've also had much newer Herc 4500 Kyro II drivers then he used for a few weeks now.

Anyway appart from a few minor problems I liked the review. It was fair and a thorough review all round.
 

phsstpok

Splendid
Dec 31, 2007
5,600
0
25,780
0
Hello, Teasy. I noticed that the Kyro II is already available in your country. Do you you own one? It sounds like you don't because you keep mentioning the Kyro 1. In any case, the performance problems that you are describing regarding DX8 vs DX7. Do they apply to the Kyro II? (Sorry, if I am asking for information that is already posted but this thread is now to long to scan through it's entirety). Have you tried the beta DirectX 8.1 drivers. You can find them at them at <A HREF="http://www.3dchipset.com" target="_new">http://www.3dchipset.com</A>

<b>Update: It looks the links for the DirectX 8.1 downloads have been removed. Sorry.</b>

<font color=red>I found another link for DirectX 8.1</font color=red>

<A HREF="http://www.Gamers-Ammo.com" target="_new">http://www.Gamers-Ammo.com</A>

p.s.

Teasy, please respond in my new thread entitled "Kyro II - New Thread".

As I mentioned, the old thread is too long! It now takes IE nearly 2 minutes to load it on my 56K modem.

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by phsstpok on 04/25/01 03:52 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
 

noko

Distinguished
Jan 22, 2001
2,407
0
19,780
0
<font color=blue><i>Were are the major problems with the drivers? I haven't seen many problems. The drivers are very stable and largely problem free. On your point about it being slower on a slower system this is again allot to do with the DX8 bug. In a game like Giants I lose 15fps with DX8 installed when advanced water effects and shadows are enabled. With DX7 installed I lose no speed. This shows that those features are using rendering into textures and DX8 is wrongly using the CPU to perform the calculations when the Kyro II can render into textures in HW. MS have admited its there fault and they'll fix it......
</font color=blue></i>

I would think most of us thank you for your time, energy and well thought out responses. With your good relations with PowerVR and able to test the newest drivers could your tell us the following:

1. Is the Kyro2 reference drivers Win2K performance on par with the Win9x drivers? If not where does it fall short.

2 OpernGL support and DX8 support in W2k?

3. Since DX8 in W2k is a different version due to the Win2K kernel and requirements does it still have the error in preventing the Kyro2 to rendering to a texture.?

4. Windows XP driver support? Are there drivers addressing this new and exciting operating system based on the NT/Win2k kernel?

5. Where on the web can we see benchmarks of the Kyro2 in W2k? (To show that W2k drivers are available and working like they should as compared to the Win9x drivers.)

I agree with the price coming down on the Kyro2 shortly after lauch in May but the prices of all cards will be coming down as well. GF2s can be had now in the States for $131, Radeons 32meg DDR for $72, mx's $50-100. So far the prices for pre-ordering the 3d Prohet 4500 is around the suggested retail price and some even higher. By the time the 3d Prohet 4500 comes down in price it will be another 2 months in which the current batch of cards will be even be much less. We are not talking now of a available card in the states.

The superior FSAA of the Kyro2 showed well in Tom's Hardware review and kick some major butt. Plus I enjoyed seeing the Kyro2 on a high end system for once which performed well as compared to a 700mzh Duron system where the nVidia MX card beat it in numerous tests. Still not convince that the Kyro2 card would perform that well in a sub 1ghz machine due to the dependency on the cpu. Also having DX7 vice DX8 as you mention helped performance due to the DX8 bug with the Kyro2. Any idea how long someone will have to wait before Microsoft fixes the problem with DX8?
 
G

Guest

Guest
The Kyro II based 32mb Vivid!XS and 64mb Hercules prophet 4500 are now selling online in the U.K but the first Kyro II cards still aren't in stock. Yes the DX8 problem will also effect the Kyro II but hopefully MS will fix the problem very soon. I have tried DX8.1 but it doesn't fix the problem, but then DX8.1 isn't finished yet so it might be fixed by the time its finished. Hopefully I'll have more info on this soon.

I also think this DX8 problem is why the Kyro II doesn't do well in Aquanox. There doesn't seem to be any other logical explanation for it doing worse then the other cards since they all use SW T&L in Aquanox because of the vertex shaders.

I just got this info from Matt of IMGTEC:

"This is exactly correct. We do support render to texture but DX7 does not have a flag for that so you need a hardcoded list. MS have a hardcoded list for non DX7 features which DX7 level drivers do support. So the solution is to update that list hopefully this will have occured by the time DX8.1 is officially released. We could also update our driver to export the render to texture cap but I have no info at present as to whether this will occur. Currently we are working with Microsoft to find a solution by the time DX8.1 is released."

So it looks like there will be a solution one way or the other by May or June when DX8.1 is officially released. The Kyro II's released on May 16th in the U.S (I think thats the right date) so hopefully this problem won't effect many people buying a Kyro II since the problem should be fixed then or shortly after.
 
G

Guest

Guest
:)
continuation of this thread :
<A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=faq&notfound=1&code=1" target="_new">kyro 2 the killer of Nvidia part 2</A>
 

HolyGrenade

Distinguished
Feb 8, 2001
3,359
0
20,780
0
Damn! and I was hoping this thread will reach 500 posts!


<font color=red>"My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and dispair!"</font color=red>
 

chrisojeda

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
180
0
18,680
0
Okay...I just wanted to post on this thread for the hell of it....Sorry but I did not read any of your posts because after glancing over it you all need to learn about "Brevity" and quit the b.s.-ing...Cheers...Chris

It worked yesterday! :lol:
 
G

Guest

Guest
<<<<<1. Is the Kyro2 reference drivers Win2K performance on par with the Win9x drivers? If not where does it fall short.>>>>

I don't use W2k but I do know that the W2k drivers are just as fast and sometimes faster then the W98 driver. The main reason for this is when Kyro 1 came out they made the drivers from the ground up (they didn't just change the Neon250 drivers) and since W2k was out when Kyro 1 was released W2k development is at the same stage as W98 development.

<<<<OpernGL support and DX8 support in W2k?>>>>

Just about identicle to W98 support AFAIK. As I say I don't use W2k but I know allot of people using Kyro 1 cards with W2k and I've also seen a few reviews comparing Kyro 1 W2k and W98 performance and Kyro II uses the same drivers as the Kyro 1 (just slightly modified).

<<<<<3. Since DX8 in W2k is a different version due to the Win2K kernel and requirements does it still have the error in preventing the Kyro2 to rendering to a texture.?>>>>

Yes the problem is also in W2k. The problem was that MS didn't know that Kyro 1 or II supported rendering into textures so they didn't add the feature into DX8. This was when the Kyro II was not announced and only the less famous Kyro 1 was around. I'm pretty sure this problem wouldn't have occured if Kyro II had been out when DX8 was first released because of the Kyro II's current high profile image.

<<<<4. Windows XP driver support? Are there drivers addressing this new and exciting operating system based on the NT/Win2k kernel?>>>>

At this stage I haven't heard anything of WinXP drivers but I'd expect them to be in development, I'll try to find out though.

<<<<5. Where on the web can we see benchmarks of the Kyro2 in W2k? (To show that W2k drivers are available and working like they should as compared to the Win9x drivers.)>>>>

I think there is a Kyro II review like that out there but I can't remember where. I'll try to find it though.

<<<<I agree with the price coming down on the Kyro2 shortly after lauch in May but the prices of all cards will be coming down as well. GF2s can be had now in the States for $131, Radeons 32meg DDR for $72, mx's $50-100. So far the prices for pre-ordering the 3d Prohet 4500 is around the suggested retail price and some even higher. By the time the 3d Prohet 4500 comes down in price it will be another 2 months in which the current batch of cards will be even be much less. We are not talking now of a available card in the states.>>>>

I'm not sure how long prices of nvidia cards can keep falling without making a loss. In the end the Kyro II costs almost exactly the same to make as the Kyro 1, it only has 15 million transistors and is far cheaper to produce then anything Nvidia have in its performance range. Powercolor should have a 32mb card out soon (without the Powercolor name) and it'll be very very cheap for the performance. The 32mb Kyro II is by far the best deal I've ever seen for a graphics card here in the U.K. £85 inc VAT with free delivery and TV-Out, were as the 32mb GTS can't be found for less then £150 (I can't even find one for that price) and the MX 32mb without TV-Out costs £80 (thats the cheapest I can find). When a 32mb Kyro II comes out in the U.S (thats if Nvidia haven't put all the cheap bpard makers off that is) I'd expect it to be allot cheaper then the 32mb Kyro II here in the U.K just the same as the Kyro 1 was. In the U.K the Kyro I 32mb based Vivid! was £115 at release and in the U.S a 64mb Powercolor Kyro 1 could be found in the U.K for $115.

<<<<The superior FSAA of the Kyro2 showed well in Tom's Hardware review and kick some major butt. Plus I enjoyed seeing the Kyro2 on a high end system for once which performed well as compared to a 700mzh Duron system where the nVidia MX card beat it in numerous tests. Still not convince that the Kyro2 card would perform that well in a sub 1ghz machine due to the dependency on the cpu. Also having DX7 vice DX8 as you mention helped performance due to the DX8 bug with the Kyro2. Any idea how long someone will have to wait before Microsoft fixes the problem with DX8?>>>>

Allot of that CPU dependency is the fault of the DX8 problem which is using the CPU to do anything which needs rendering into textures (most games do) which the Kyro II would normally be doing in hardware with no CPU hit.

I think IMGTEC will be trying very hard to get this fixed for all the Kyro II reviews. So far there's been lots of previews but sites like Anand will be doing there final review in a few weeks and they'll want it fixed by then. This problem wasn't found until 3dmark2001 was released so MS and IMGTEC haven't had too long to fix it so far.
 

phsstpok

Splendid
Dec 31, 2007
5,600
0
25,780
0
I certainly hope the DX8 problems are resolved.

As for Aquanox, I hope the game at least looks amazing because at 19.4 fps using a Geforce 3 at 1024x768x32, it certainly won't be very playable. I wonder what features are in force resulting in such low framerates. I doubt I will be playing that game on my Geforce256 SDR.
 

noko

Distinguished
Jan 22, 2001
2,407
0
19,780
0
Thanks for your outstanding reply. Its kinda funny that the Kyro2 does so well with a crippled DX8 hurting the Kyro2 performance. Which just means it will do even better when DX8 is fixed and addresses the problem that ties up the CPU with textures when the Kyro2 can do it many times faster on the card. I believe virtually all the benchmarks on all the reviews where done using DX8 alone, which means the true performance of the Kyro2 card will be much much better.

If W2k drivers are as good as Win9x drivers then I highly recommend the Kyro2. Even the Radeon after almost a year has crappy DX7 drivers in W2k as in DX7 games run like 60% of Win9x performance. So far the only DX8 item and test besides AquaNox is 3dMark2001 which the Radeon runs in W2K just as good as Win9x which is even more stranger considering the lack lusty performance of 3dMark2000 in W2k.

Still the lack of T&L will hurt the Kyro2 performance with lower end cpu's which is indicated when a MX card could keep up and surpass a Kyro2 in a Duron700 machine. With higher end cpu's the hardware T&L hurt the performance of those cards when in high resolutions when there is a bandwidth problem. Sounds like smarter technology to me for the Kyro because even with SDRam, it doesn't have servere bandwidth problems in high resolutions. Still there are exceptions with T&L cards in high resolutions where a T&L card can add significant performance increases in rendering, i.e. 3d modellers.

Really the low prices on GF2s are maybe clearance of older technology while the GF2 pros takes its place. I believe the GF2 mx is a dead end card with a short expected life. The mx doesn't compare to the Kyro2 nor to the lower price DDR Radeons. The Kyro2 is really a blessing because it contributed in the price reductions of the nVidia chipset cards and will probably contribute in ATI stepping up their new releases and even further price reductions. After 8 months I think the Radeon is reaching not only its maturity but also the need for an update.
 
G

Guest

Guest
EVERYBODY PLEASE TAKE NOTE:

<font color=red>---------------------------------DO NOT POST HERE---------------------------------</font color=red>

<font color=blue>---------------------------------DO NOT POST HERE---------------------------------</font color=blue>

<font color=yellow>---------------------------------DO NOT POST HERE---------------------------------</font color=yellow>

<font color=green>---------------------------------DO NOT POST HERE---------------------------------</font color=green>

<font color=purple>---------------------------------DO NOT POST HERE---------------------------------</font color=purple>

<font color=orange>---------------------------------DO NOT POST HERE---------------------------------</font color=orange>

<font color=red>---------------------------------DO NOT POST HERE---------------------------------</font color=red>

<font color=blue>---------------------------------DO NOT POST HERE---------------------------------</font color=blue>

<font color=yellow>---------------------------------DO NOT POST HERE---------------------------------</font color=yellow>

<font color=green>---------------------------------DO NOT POST HERE---------------------------------</font color=green>

<font color=purple>---------------------------------DO NOT POST HERE---------------------------------</font color=purple>

<font color=orange>---------------------------------DO NOT POST HERE---------------------------------</font color=orange>

Please continue your comments in the new thread, <A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=faq&notfound=1&code=1" target="_new">Kyro 2 - Part 2</A>. That way our friends on dial-up can enjoy the thread without having to wait 2 minutes for it to load each time. :cool:

Thanks,
Warden
 
G

Guest

Guest
Why are you loading the whole thread instead of where you left off?

Athlon-C 1.33@1.5
Asus A7M266 @ 150 MHz FSB
2x 256 MB CAS 2.5 Crucial PC2100 SDRAM @ CAS 2/2/2
 
G

Guest

Guest
yap !!
good point noko !
But I don't know what are the games that use that crippled feature of kyro 2
Maybe most of them I don't know...

I am with a crap 33.6 modem and I only read the last pages..
;)
No problems here...

you can allways post here and on the part 2 ...
;)
 
G

Guest

Guest
this topic should be on first page !!!
there are to much info here !!
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS