D
Dale
Paul
Sorry it took so long to get back to you. I did as you suggested (ordered
from Newegg). Working great AND I have 3D ! Thank you for your help. You
folks are AWESOME.
--
dale
"Paul" wrote:
> Dale wrote:
> > I would appreciate some help on replacing a video card. I have no clue as to
> > what to purchase. It's is overwhelming.
> >
> > Below I have listed the infomation on the current card. I do not need a high
> > power (gaming) card. Just something simple.
> >
> > Thank you for ANY information.
> >
> > Side One
> > 1997 STB Systems Rev B [Stamped on Board]
> > Product of Mexico
> > Way Vel 128 AGP NO/TV
> > Video Adapter
> >
> > Computer:
> > Operating System Microsoft Windows XP
> > Product HP Vectra
> > Version VE8
> > Product 440BX
> > AGP Transfer Rate 1x
> > Processor:
> > Version Pentium II
> > Current Clock 333 MHz
>
> > Video Adapter Velocity 128 (4 MB)
> > Hardware Driver nv3.dll
> > 3D Accelerator nVIDIA RIVA128
> > Monitor 19" VSC111E:
> > Mode 1024 x 768 x 4294967296 colors
> > (Q87070323615)
> >
> > AGP Slot:
> > AGP Version 1.00
> > AGP Status Enabled
> > AGP Aperture Size 64 MB
> > Supported AGP Speeds 1x, 2x
> > Current AGP Speed 1x
> >
> > Monitor: ViewSonic VA903 SERIES [Monitor] (19.1"vis, s/n Q87070323615,
> > January 2007)
> >
>
> OK, what I see is a 3.3V AGP 1X/2X slot on a 440BX motherboard. The monitor
> is 19", 1280x1024 native resolution, with a 15 pin VGA connector.
>
> I'm not doing very well with search engines right now, and this is a page for VA903.
>
> http://www1.epinions.com/specs/ViewSonic_VA903B_Monitor
>
> What I've used on my 440BX board, is an Nvidia FX5200 AGP. I've tried
> the card on a AGP 1X slot and an AGP 8X slot and it works with both.
> So it is a universal card. It should be able to do 1280x1024 on VGA
> without a problem (that is the resolution my monitor uses). On those
> kind of older cards, you can never be sure the DVI connector is capable
> of doing the full range up to 1920x1080, but that will be an issue for
> another day (and another monitor purchase).
>
> As an example, there is an FX5200 here, with both a DVI and a VGA connector
> on it, and it is $32. You can't go wrong at that price, even if you
> only get a year of usage from it. There is no fan on this unit. If
> you ever find the card is unstable (I have an FX5200 AGP here that
> is not stable unless a fan is pointed at it), you can add a fan right next
> to the video card slot to improve the cooling. I needed the fan when gaming,
> and since you're not using it for gaming, you might get away without
> adding a fan. The thing is, the tiny fans on video cards don't last
> forever, so in some ways, the ability to buy and install your
> own fan is a bonus.
>
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814187045
>
> In one of the reviews, you can see this comment.
>
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductReview.aspx?Item=N82E16814187045
>
> "DVI port would not support the resolution of my screen (1920X1200),
> the maximum it can do is 1600x1200, which looks awful on my wide screen.
> So have to use RGB [VGA] plug. If I knew it in advance would not buy it."
>
> This is a known issue with some of the older cards, in that the bandwidth
> of the hardware driving the DVI connector is not up to the full 165MHz
> spec. Some old cards were limited to 135MHz. To "protect" the users,
> the Nvidia driver prevents selecting resolutions above a certain level.
> So if someone owning this card, expects to run out and buy a new LCD
> monitor with only a DVI connector on it, then the native resolution of
> the new monitor should be considered, with respect to the limitations
> of the FX5200. If you bought a 1680x1050 DVI monitor, expect a distorted
> looking display because of not running at native resolution. If you buy
> a new monitor with a VGA connector as well as DVI, then you have more
> connection options. But cheap LCD monitors only have DVI now.
>
> So the main reason I'm recommending this card, is I've tested it. I own
> three different FX5200's. I have two AGP ones and a PCI one. And
> so far, they've worked in all the computers I've tested them on.
> That is their only "feature", as otherwise they're a pretty
> crap card as far as a gamer would be concerned. But for 32 bucks,
> it's an adventure.
>
> If you want background information on video card selection, this
> page is good. But I suspect you're not going to find much better
> than the FX5200, as more modern cards use Rialto or HSI bridges,
> and those only run 1.5V slots. The 440BX is for a 3.3V slot
> motherboard, so you need to find an AGP card with a native AGP
> GPU chip on it (some native chips supported both 1.5V and 3.3V).
> And in terms of what is still on the market, the FX5200 AGP is
> the least risk, even with its DVI issues. The 6200 might work (the ones
> I see have two slots cut in them, so that means they should run
> at 1.5 or 3.3V for I/O). But I'd really want proof they've been
> tested in a 440BX and don't cause trouble.
>
> http://www.playtool.com/pages/agpcompat/agp.html
>
> The playtool article also mentions the AGP power issue. Some old
> machines from that era, use a linear regulator for one of the
> voltages the video card needs. I think I bought a TNT card
> years ago, and it black screened in my 440BX machine, and I suspect
> it was a power issue. And my motherboard isn't even one of the ones
> known to have problems. But I didn't have a problem with the
> FX5200, for whatever that is worth.
>
> When installing a new video card, remove the old Windows driver first,
> then shut down, change video cards, boot up, and install the
> new driver. Nvidia will have stopped issuing new drivers
> for the FX5200, but I don't expect that to be a problem.
> The nice thing about the FX5200, is it covers the older
> OSes well, and you can also get a Win98 driver for it.
> Since you're not likely to ever run Win7 on a 333MHz processor,
> I'm not too worried about no driver for Win7
>
> HTH,
> Paul
> .
>
Sorry it took so long to get back to you. I did as you suggested (ordered
from Newegg). Working great AND I have 3D ! Thank you for your help. You
folks are AWESOME.
--
dale
"Paul" wrote:
> Dale wrote:
> > I would appreciate some help on replacing a video card. I have no clue as to
> > what to purchase. It's is overwhelming.
> >
> > Below I have listed the infomation on the current card. I do not need a high
> > power (gaming) card. Just something simple.
> >
> > Thank you for ANY information.
> >
> > Side One
> > 1997 STB Systems Rev B [Stamped on Board]
> > Product of Mexico
> > Way Vel 128 AGP NO/TV
> > Video Adapter
> >
> > Computer:
> > Operating System Microsoft Windows XP
> > Product HP Vectra
> > Version VE8
> > Product 440BX
> > AGP Transfer Rate 1x
> > Processor:
> > Version Pentium II
> > Current Clock 333 MHz
>
> > Video Adapter Velocity 128 (4 MB)
> > Hardware Driver nv3.dll
> > 3D Accelerator nVIDIA RIVA128
> > Monitor 19" VSC111E:
> > Mode 1024 x 768 x 4294967296 colors
> > (Q87070323615)
> >
> > AGP Slot:
> > AGP Version 1.00
> > AGP Status Enabled
> > AGP Aperture Size 64 MB
> > Supported AGP Speeds 1x, 2x
> > Current AGP Speed 1x
> >
> > Monitor: ViewSonic VA903 SERIES [Monitor] (19.1"vis, s/n Q87070323615,
> > January 2007)
> >
>
> OK, what I see is a 3.3V AGP 1X/2X slot on a 440BX motherboard. The monitor
> is 19", 1280x1024 native resolution, with a 15 pin VGA connector.
>
> I'm not doing very well with search engines right now, and this is a page for VA903.
>
> http://www1.epinions.com/specs/ViewSonic_VA903B_Monitor
>
> What I've used on my 440BX board, is an Nvidia FX5200 AGP. I've tried
> the card on a AGP 1X slot and an AGP 8X slot and it works with both.
> So it is a universal card. It should be able to do 1280x1024 on VGA
> without a problem (that is the resolution my monitor uses). On those
> kind of older cards, you can never be sure the DVI connector is capable
> of doing the full range up to 1920x1080, but that will be an issue for
> another day (and another monitor purchase).
>
> As an example, there is an FX5200 here, with both a DVI and a VGA connector
> on it, and it is $32. You can't go wrong at that price, even if you
> only get a year of usage from it. There is no fan on this unit. If
> you ever find the card is unstable (I have an FX5200 AGP here that
> is not stable unless a fan is pointed at it), you can add a fan right next
> to the video card slot to improve the cooling. I needed the fan when gaming,
> and since you're not using it for gaming, you might get away without
> adding a fan. The thing is, the tiny fans on video cards don't last
> forever, so in some ways, the ability to buy and install your
> own fan is a bonus.
>
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814187045
>
> In one of the reviews, you can see this comment.
>
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductReview.aspx?Item=N82E16814187045
>
> "DVI port would not support the resolution of my screen (1920X1200),
> the maximum it can do is 1600x1200, which looks awful on my wide screen.
> So have to use RGB [VGA] plug. If I knew it in advance would not buy it."
>
> This is a known issue with some of the older cards, in that the bandwidth
> of the hardware driving the DVI connector is not up to the full 165MHz
> spec. Some old cards were limited to 135MHz. To "protect" the users,
> the Nvidia driver prevents selecting resolutions above a certain level.
> So if someone owning this card, expects to run out and buy a new LCD
> monitor with only a DVI connector on it, then the native resolution of
> the new monitor should be considered, with respect to the limitations
> of the FX5200. If you bought a 1680x1050 DVI monitor, expect a distorted
> looking display because of not running at native resolution. If you buy
> a new monitor with a VGA connector as well as DVI, then you have more
> connection options. But cheap LCD monitors only have DVI now.
>
> So the main reason I'm recommending this card, is I've tested it. I own
> three different FX5200's. I have two AGP ones and a PCI one. And
> so far, they've worked in all the computers I've tested them on.
> That is their only "feature", as otherwise they're a pretty
> crap card as far as a gamer would be concerned. But for 32 bucks,
> it's an adventure.
>
> If you want background information on video card selection, this
> page is good. But I suspect you're not going to find much better
> than the FX5200, as more modern cards use Rialto or HSI bridges,
> and those only run 1.5V slots. The 440BX is for a 3.3V slot
> motherboard, so you need to find an AGP card with a native AGP
> GPU chip on it (some native chips supported both 1.5V and 3.3V).
> And in terms of what is still on the market, the FX5200 AGP is
> the least risk, even with its DVI issues. The 6200 might work (the ones
> I see have two slots cut in them, so that means they should run
> at 1.5 or 3.3V for I/O). But I'd really want proof they've been
> tested in a 440BX and don't cause trouble.
>
> http://www.playtool.com/pages/agpcompat/agp.html
>
> The playtool article also mentions the AGP power issue. Some old
> machines from that era, use a linear regulator for one of the
> voltages the video card needs. I think I bought a TNT card
> years ago, and it black screened in my 440BX machine, and I suspect
> it was a power issue. And my motherboard isn't even one of the ones
> known to have problems. But I didn't have a problem with the
> FX5200, for whatever that is worth.
>
> When installing a new video card, remove the old Windows driver first,
> then shut down, change video cards, boot up, and install the
> new driver. Nvidia will have stopped issuing new drivers
> for the FX5200, but I don't expect that to be a problem.
> The nice thing about the FX5200, is it covers the older
> OSes well, and you can also get a Win98 driver for it.
> Since you're not likely to ever run Win7 on a 333MHz processor,
> I'm not too worried about no driver for Win7
>
> HTH,
> Paul
> .
>