Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 37

Thread: [8.42.3] X1950Pro AGP vs 9500Pro AGP the winner? Clearly the 9500Pro! ... what?!

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    415

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Crunchy View Post
    I've at least managed to sort the black/blank 3D. Setting AGP Aperture to 256MB or higher sorts it. I see my card gets detected as a 256MB card where its actually 512MB, I wonder if that's the problem?
    I think i mentioned this here, or in other posts, the driver bugs out with the wrong AGP apperture size. You need to have atleast half your mem. Anything less and you get missing 3d Surfaces, and slow/buggy 2d acceleration.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    9

    Default

    Did you try to set this option in Device section allready?

    Code:
    Option      "MaxGARTSize" "512"
    Check also in Bios if AGP size is set to 512M
    Last edited by soundworks2; 10-29-2007 at 03:40 PM.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    73

    Default

    I just tried that soundworks2 and it didn't help :/

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    19

    Default

    I wonder if any of you have VIA based motherboard?

    I'm currently looking into purchasing X1950Pro AGP, and after much googling, it appears all problematic motherboards are based on NVIDIA or SiS chipsets, while those with VIA chipsets do not have any problems. These ovservations are all from the Windows systems though.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    19

    Default

    In somewhat related news, ATI/AMD has replaced their own AGP driver with the one from the current kernel in the latest driver release:
    http://kernelslacker.livejournal.com/96680.html

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    415

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by figvam View Post
    I wonder if any of you have VIA based motherboard?

    I'm currently looking into purchasing X1950Pro AGP, and after much googling, it appears all problematic motherboards are based on NVIDIA or SiS chipsets, while those with VIA chipsets do not have any problems. These ovservations are all from the Windows systems though.
    Via chipset here...

    I haven't tried the build in AGP yet, e.g. make it a module on the kernel side and not load it (or not make it at all) maybe worth a try, but with what you just posted below, it seems like they will only use their build in AGP driver, and no longer the kernel one? I surly hope that's not true.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    73

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by figvam View Post
    I wonder if any of you have VIA based motherboard?

    I'm currently looking into purchasing X1950Pro AGP, and after much googling, it appears all problematic motherboards are based on NVIDIA or SiS chipsets, while those with VIA chipsets do not have any problems. These ovservations are all from the Windows systems though.
    I have an nForce3 based mobo. I do have that problem with Vista + Dual Core + ATI AGP card = bleh. It's the last time I buy upgrades for an aging system in the hope to tide it over till I can afford a full upgrade. I'll save my money and the headaches another time .

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oliver View Post
    Via chipset here...

    I haven't tried the build in AGP yet, e.g. make it a module on the kernel side and not load it (or not make it at all) maybe worth a try, but with what you just posted below, it seems like they will only use their build in AGP driver, and no longer the kernel one? I surly hope that's not true.
    Well, it blows a huge hole in my theory that VIA chipsets are safe.
    I guess I'll better look for Geforce 7950 GS AGP then, even though it's generally slower than X1950 Pro.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    415

    Default

    I'm happily using my 9500Pro again, it's now 4 years old and still works

    As for the 1950 ... i'll just wait for the 8.43 drivers and try again, complain again, and not use it again. I suppose i'm 'easy going' on it as it was handed down to me for free ...

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    9

    Default

    Hi every body

    I have very good news for Fedora Core 7 users using like me X1950 AGP with fglrx 8.42.3...

    The problem with XGL is fixed now for me...

    I did "yum update" to latest updates from official FC7 repositories. This way I landed with new kernel version 2.6.23.1-10.fc7.

    So I tried to rebuild FC7 packages for new kernel and it didn't worked... build failures as expected ( there exist a patch for kernel 2.6.23 )

    Befor I started to google for this patch, I tried to find fglrx package from yum..... and I found it allready build for new kernel... on livna repo.

    Closest thing is to try it... , so I removed my self builde fglrx packages ( yum remove `rpm -qa | grep fglrx` ) and installed livna packages:

    xorg-x11-drv-fglrx-devel-8.42.3-6.lvn7
    xorg-x11-drv-fglrx-8.42.3-6.lvn7
    kmod-fglrx-8.42.3-4.2.6.23.1_10.fc7

    Livna guys did the whole work, I can run against fgl_glxgears, no corruptions or versions missmatch !!!

    I will have to do some additional tests now ( vlc video playback using openGL, and Beryl )

    Great thanks to liva guys for great job!!!
    Last edited by soundworks2; 11-02-2007 at 07:24 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •