View Full Version : Radeon / Software / Mac's in general

02-14-2001, 03:24 AM
Just received my Radeon PCI card. I used ATI's "trade up program" and probably paid too much but at least I found a good use for my old IX Micro TT card. What's happening is, I install the Radeon in my S900 (OS 9.1) and, seeing as I already had the Radeon software installed for my Rage Orion, (worked fine) I installed the Radeon, lit the fuse and. . . .no picture. Next I try it with extentions off and get 640X480 (to be expected). I restart and get 640X480 which changes to 1024X 768 part way through startup.
This is where I'm confounded. Starts @ 640X480 and changes to 1024X768. It used to start @ 1024x768 and I can't get it back. I remember encountering this in the past but I don't know what I did to fix it.
Rebuilt desktop, reset the PRAM (back to no picture, had to restart w/o extentions) reset the CUDA, tossed the pref's, went back to the Orion and it still starts with 640X480 and switches to 1024X768. HELP!!
Oh yeah. . .wonder what no picture when the PRAM is reset means?

02-14-2001, 08:14 AM
when it starts up at 640x480 it is merely syncing and starting up in generic mode. When the card firmware driver is loaded, the preferred resolution is read and loaded, hence the shift to 1024x768.

make sure you are running the latest Radeon driver. We have it on our FTP site, and you can probably get it from ATI's website as well.

02-14-2001, 11:57 AM
Try Apple's OpenGL 1.2.1 package. It's in 9.1 and works with 8.6 ->.

02-14-2001, 12:52 PM

When I installed the Radeon PCI in my PowerTower Pro, I did the enclosed CD's full install. I did not have another ATI card. As mentioned, there is an updater which I have not applied yet because my PTP is elsewhere at the moment.

This is what was installed by the CD installer:
ATI Displays, 2.8.1
ATI Extension, 2.8.1
ATI Graphics Accelerator, 5.3.3
ATI Mac2TV Monitor, 2.8.1
ATI Radeon 3D Accelerator, 6.1.6
ATI Rage 128 3D Accelerator, either 6.0.6 or 6.0.1 (can't read my handwriting)
ATI Resource Manager, 2.8.2
ATI ROM Xtender, 1.0.1

These next two, I forget whether they were installed by OS9.0.4 or the Radeon CD:

ATI Video Accelerator, 4.6.9
ATI Video Digitizer, 4.3.2

As part of the Radeon CD install, it installed OpenGL 1.2.1, and I think this is where the following were installed, but anyway they are there:
ATI 3D Accelerator, 5.0.3
ATI Driver Update, 1.6.8
ATI MPP Manager, 1.2

The docs on the CD state that this full install does install some inits that don't apply to the Radeon PCI but says they will not interfere and just leave them there. Since this is my first ATI card, I just left all that stuff there. Jeez, what a ton of stuff for one card. Almost its own OS. Never had a video card that needed so much, maybe a third of all that, at most. But the Radeon worked right from the get go. I did a 30 second holding the Cuda Reset button to clear PRAM and NVRAM as I recall. I did get the 640x480 on startup a couple of times, then it settled down to booting at my 1152x870xMillions preference.

Maybe you need to do the install off of the CD to be sure you have everything. One thing about the CD installer, it did it all for me. Very simple. k

02-14-2001, 02:15 PM
k, that was always my primary gripe about ATI boards before they finally shipped the Rage 128's. Tons of extensions. And it is virtually impossible to prevent games and different things from overwriting newer versions with older versions of these various resources, and worse, ATI sometimes changes the NAMES of this stuff, so you end up with redundant resources.

well, when we saw the Rage 128's running at MW-SF a couple years ago, one January, we decided to carry them. This was just before ixM went under, before MacTell went under, before Formac sold direct in the US, before MicroConversions went under, and before 3Dfx had entered the market.

that was when ATI decided not to ship until friggin' JULY.

which was my second gripe with them. My original gripe was their sluggish performance. When their boards were 64-bit, I found them unusably slow. The Rage 128's fixed that. They just didn't ship them.

now...well, let's just say they could have done a better job getting Radeon into the channel. I sure would like to smack someone upside the head for failing to ensure that Radeon shipped in time for the holidays.

02-14-2001, 03:13 PM
The reason that I said try OpenGL 1.2.1 is that it has all the latest stuff for the 128 (Orion) and the Radeon; ATI drivers and libraries and the matching OpenGL goodies for both those cards.

02-14-2001, 04:54 PM
Kaye, Louie, magician,

Guess what? My computer now starts with 1024X768. After all this tearing my hair out, doing all the things I mentioned in my original e-mail, bothering you and trying to figure this out to the point of overheating my brain (smoke comes out of my ears just like Bullwinkle), I changed the resolution from 74.9Hz to 85Hz and that seems to have taken care of it. I haven’t reinstalled the Radeon yet (get to that later today) but at least I’m back to square one.
I took a quick look at the software that was installed (from the CD) and it looks like everything that Kaye mentioned is there. Per Louie’s recommendation I also checked Open GL and it is 1.2.1 except for “OpenGLRendererATI” which is 1.2.3. Question, I noticed a “Built-In Graphics Accelerator” (OS 9.1) in the extensions folder. Does it stay or should it go?
I’m going to check the drivers (thanks magician) to make sure they are the latest ones. I saw a Radeon upgrade at Version Tracker (thanks Gurus). I will check it out (at your site also) and do what I have to do. One final question. I remember reading that you should unplug the machine when you reset the CUDA. This was some time ago and what stuck in my mind was the statement “ this is the only thing you will ever do to your computer with it unplugged”.

Thanks to all


02-14-2001, 05:15 PM
Built-in Graphics Accellerator is for older machines with on-board video such as 7300, 8500, etc.

I don't unplug for a CUDA reset. It has been mentioned as part of the ultimate purge where you desparately let it sit overnight with the battery removed.

02-14-2001, 08:09 PM
Hey Hartello,

I have experienced a similar phenomenon with some rez/refresh settings with my 3Dfx Voodoo5 card and Mitsubishi DiamondPro 2020u monitor. Here's what I think is going on: Your monitor has a built-in set of rez/refresh rates that it knows and likes, but it can do some more if driven by the video card. If you set the rez/refresh combo to a setting that the monitor has in its memory, it will remember this and start up at those settings every time. If you set a rez/refresh combo that the monitor can do but doesn't have in its memory, it will start up at default 640x480, then switch to the set combo when the video card driver software loads.

If you mouse-click the control strip monitor rez module you will see the "recommended" combos, these are only the ones that the monitor and video card both tell the system that they know. If you Control-mouse-click the control strip rez module you will see "all" the combo choices, these are cumulatively the ones that either the monitor or the video card tells the system it knows. If you stay with the "recommended" choices, you should not get a rez/refresh change at startup.

There is a cool little free utility app from Griffin called "Simple DDC", current v.1.2, which will directly parse and display your monitor's built-in parameters like supported resolutions,etc. You can independently verify your monitor's known settings with this.


02-15-2001, 01:00 AM
To everyone,

I certainly appreciate all the feedback and suggestions. I took a look at Version Tracker and there is a Radeon driver update (1.1.1). It looks like it's mostly game related. When I reinstall the Radeon, I will be connecting it to a Samsung
180T monitor. The only reason I got the Radeon in the first place was for the digital interface to the Samsung (it's supposed to be better that way?).

A question. In all this excitement I don't remember what the preferred slot for the video card is in a S900. If there is a preferred slot, which one is it?



02-15-2001, 05:37 AM
depends what are in the top two slots.

generally, a video card can go in any slot in the S900.

02-15-2001, 09:25 AM
i have a rage orion in slot 3 of my s900. works fine.

02-15-2001, 04:44 PM
And the beat goes on. Back to the Radeon and I have to say that this is without a doubt the most balky ATI card I have ever worked with. I removed the Orion (slot 4) and installed the Radeon. It wouldn't work at all. I tried everything I could think of without the monitor available and it just did nothing.
Out of slot 4, into slot 3. It works, but it was a chore getting there. It won't sync like the Orion does either. I also had artifacts (?) that seem to have stopped since I disabled the "Built in Graphics Accelerator” extension . Maybe I'll see how I like my the Samsung in the analog mode.


02-28-2001, 10:56 AM
I might as well jump in here because I am having the same problem with a new PCI Radeon card in a Mac 9600/200. When I put the Radeon card in the 9600 it will no longer recover from restart. It begins to come back, a "Power Saver" message flashes on my Mitusbishi Diamond Plus 91, and then it goes into never-never land. Turning off the power doesn't help. I never get started again. I was about to return the Radeon card, thinking it is defective.

What makes me most angry at ATI is they dumped the Rage Orion, which I would have preferred to use. But I can't find one anywhere except on eBay and I don't trust eBay.

03-01-2001, 12:41 AM
The whole thing is really frustrating. The Radeon is a love/hate situation for me. When I could get it to start and run, my flat panel monitor (digital input)
performed significantly better than either my Orion or Nexus. The way the Radeon card works for everyone else here seems to indicate a defective card is a possibility.
My Radeon is going back and I will have to try another one. I will be sure to post the outcome of this excercise.


03-01-2001, 09:11 AM
I have to say, I installed a Radeon PCI in my Beige G3 which was running 9.0.4 at the time. Everything works, I used the install CD that came with the Radeon. I have not updated the drivers, I see no reason.

Also, I've updated to OS 9.1 after the Radeon install and everything still works fine.

PS, I'm using and old Apple Multiscan 720 display.

03-02-2001, 10:38 AM
try here for rage pro. http://www.shop-csc.com/scripts/ispage26.dll

03-15-2001, 02:14 PM
This Radeon card thing is maddening. I gave up trying to make it work in one 9600 and tried a second 9600. Same experience. No recovery from restart. Is ATI retarded or what? The ATI graphics accelerator extension that is part of OS 9.1 is incompatible with the Radeon card and if you try to start with it enabled you get a bomb! So you diable the danged thing, install version 1.1.1, and then the computer won't come back up from a restart. Sounds to me like ATI rushed the pci version of the Radeon onto the market without adequate testing. I sent mine back and I'm not interested in trying another one.

03-15-2001, 03:31 PM
I received my 2nd Radeon card about a week ago and it behaves just like the first. The card is very particular about what slot it's installed in. I think I tried slot 3 and moved to slot 2 to get it to work in my S900. In order to get things up and running I installed the card, placed the ATI software (from the CD) in a folder on my desktop, restarted with extensions off, installed the software and restarted. It works. Still have the sync problem (feature?). It starts @ 640X480 and then switches to 1280X1024 and the occasional trails (?) left on the screen when you drag a folder or such. Remedy for this is a restart. I did the 1.1.1 upgrade and noticed no difference.
The other ATI cards I own work so well (I have them in everything) that I'm surprised at the Radeon's unfriendly nature. Perhaps a little software tweak from ATI is what's needed. On a more positive note, the card definitely improves the performance of my Samsung 180T. I don't know if it's the digital interface or what, but whatever it is, it's a good thing. By the way, I like this monitor. I'm not a "gamer" so I don't know how it fares in that arena but it does everything I want and it does it better than the SGI flat panel I used for a short period.
Just out of curiosity, does anyone else make a card like the Radeon?

03-15-2001, 05:38 PM
ATI and Nvidia are the only major graphics players left in the Mac Market and to that, Nvidia is only a "chip manufacturer" (meaning that another company who builds boards has to buy their chip to make a "Nvidia" board.)

I too have a Radeon PCI and everything seems to be ok. I experienced the same hang on boot thingie in my PTP though. I have it in the 4th slot (2nd busmaster) and an ATI Xclaim 3D in the 6th slot. What happened to me was something in the system tweaked out and I got a black screen on the 2nd Monitor (Xclaim) that would only show the mouse. Menus would be active beneath but nothing would show except the mouse pointer.

STRANGE! But I know that my system is on the hairy fringe of needing to be re-installed anyway.

Well I got the briliant idea of doing a PRAM zap using the P-R-Command-Option at restart. Doing this made the computer get through one chime then stop. From that point, when I hit power the fans would come on and drives spin up, however the monitors would come out of sleep for a minute then doze off again. There it would sit.

The only fix that I found was to remove the radeon, boot up, shut down, reinstall the radeon, and then boot. I tried that a couple of times, never got through more than one chime zaping pram, and had to repeat the process.

To fix the black screen on the 2nd monitor, it was all fixed by a software re-install.

Thoes of you who still have a Radeon, can you try a PRAM zap and see if it works? Maybe it has a funny start up routine that get's easliy confused?

When I'm willing to go through the process again, I'll try a TechTool PRAM Zap to see if that completes.


Edit #1:

Oh Yea, the card also starts at 640x480, gets to the OS splash screen, loads the XLR8 extension, then when it loads the first ATI extension it switches to my main rez (1024x768). I would believe that is just the way it works and the card waits to be "turned on" by the software.

Edit #2:

WOAH!! I have a Sony Multiscan17sfII that until the Radeon was locked at 1024x768 on a Mac. It said that on a PC it would do 1280x1024 but not a mac for some reason and wouldn't you konw it, it actually did what it said. Any, to see if it would for, I set it to 1280x1024 and it worked! The Radeon must talk to the monitor differently than other mac cards so the Sony thinks that this is a PC. The down side is that it only wants to use 60Hz refresh, and that was using the "all" resolutions options. I'll check the documentation, but I believe that it will go higher. Any ideas on how to get it up to 75Hz?

[This message has been edited by EGPoulin (edited 15 March 2001).]

03-15-2001, 06:07 PM
I was able to ge my Radeon card working in a Mac 9600 by shutting off the power at the bottom of a restart that didn't restart (Which I don't like to do). But startup was abnormal. The 640X480 resolution would appear followed by the XLR8 panel and extension. Then, when the montor switched resolution to 1024X768 the XLR8 panel and extension would disappear. There would be an emptyhole where the XLR8 extension had been while the rest of the extensions marched across the screen.

This led me to wonder if the Radeon card is incompatible with the XLR8 G4 software. I have a lot of PCI cards in my 9600's and don't have the inclination to move everything around until the Radeon finds a slot it will work in. If the Radeon is that temperamental I will do without it.

I returned my Radeon and, like an earler poster, I was surprised because I have ATI Rage Orions running all over the place and they are virtually foolproof. Put 'em in and start up. ATI should have kept the RAge Orion on the market so those who don't need the extra features or hassles of the Radeon would have an option.

03-15-2001, 07:11 PM
Along with the whole XLR8 extension dissapearing, it has done it to me all along anyway so I have no worry about it. I believe that it was discussed earlier and everyone agreed that it was just weird and no harm done.

Sorry to hear that the Radeon didn't thrill you, I am actaually REALLY happy right now especially since I can render OpenGL movies that look great pretty damn fast (including transpariencies and textures). That was my main concen, but the games look great too.

For anyone that was gonig to suggest switch res for my monitor res problem, the monitor really only does support 1280x1024x60Hz so I will leave it at that. I doesn't bother my eyes to much anyway so be it.


03-16-2001, 01:35 AM

You asked about other members experience with resetting the PRAM with the Radeon.
I tried this with the first card I had and the result was no picture.
I then restarted with the extensions off and the picture returned. On subsequent restarts, everything was O.K.


03-16-2001, 04:44 PM
Any issues with the Radeon and an 8500?

03-18-2001, 05:27 AM
from a hardware standpoint, we are encountering few problems with Radeon here in the basement. From a software standpoint, I really, really, really wish ATI would make an installer which is smart enough to detect later revisions of the dozen 'friggin extensions apparently required to run their boards.

in other words, what is the best way to install Radeon? MacOS 9.1 first? And then Radeon 1.1.1? This is how most of us are doing it, simply because we're running OS9.1 before we upgrade to Radeon.

well. I sure do miss my dual Nexus, as 2D scrolling is broken on at least one of the machines here now, and it is almost certainly due to the sheer multitude of confusingly named ATI extensions getting all jumbled up. I am pruning extensions folders, and that is not among my favorite activities. Especially when that same system folder has been flying for months with no problems.

I hate it when manufacturers make me waste my time getting their stuff to work.


oh, yeah. Just a comment from the peanut gallery. No problem with Radeon in the 9600, beige G3, Yose, 7500, 8500, PowerCurve, PowerWave, and StarMax 5k. At least, no hardware problems.

[This message has been edited by magician (edited 18 March 2001).]

03-19-2001, 02:59 PM
I'm not at home with my 8500 right now but...

I have 9.1 installed already and have just the Apple built-in video. I can safely remove all existing ATI extensions *before* installing the Radeon board, right? I mean, I don't think my non-ATI system should have any use for the ATI extensions.

Also, my main goal here is to have dual monitor support. I assume I'll still be able to use my built-in video for another monitor? I need a monitor for all the pesky palettes...

I'm also interested in seeing how a modern game will play, I've never bothered with them since I had an antiquated video out. Any suggestions on cool 3D games to take advantage of this bad boy? http://macgurus.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

03-19-2001, 03:51 PM
You have to wonder what the engineers at ATI were doing when they made a video card that is incompatible with the ATI graphics accelerator extension that is part of the Mac OS 9.1? Do the ATI software people and hardware people live on two different planets? It is one thing when 3rd party extensions don't get along but when ATI's latest card crashes your computer if you install it on Apple's latest OS because ATI's own (mostly) latest stuff can't live together, that is a first!

03-19-2001, 09:58 PM
It's not really a first; they've done it before, but this is worse than earlier.

03-20-2001, 06:06 AM
I refuse to sell these boards until they pull their heads out of their asses and release a better driver update. I'm about ready to revert back to Nexus boards.

assholes. Companies like this deserve to go under. Good companies, like 3Dfx, well, they just get borged.

I should go to bed.


03-20-2001, 02:19 PM
How could 3dfx win a lawsuit against Nvidia for stealing their secrets and then get bought out by Nvidia and put to sleep??

03-20-2001, 09:46 PM
somebody made a shitload of cash.

03-20-2001, 11:01 PM
and in the meantime, I'm a 'friggin Guru and I'm still wrestling with these stupid boards. Sure, they work fine if you install just one in a bland machine. Try to use a pair in a souped up 9600 with a Rage 128VR.

I would give anything to punch the CEO of ATI right on the nose. Not because of this specific problem. But because this SORT of problem has been standard with them for YEARS, and they still can't get it right, or communicate effectively with customers, or fix their shit in a timely fashion. And this is what we're doomed to deal with in the Mac market.

ATI, a company that can't ship before Christmas, and when it does ship, ships shit. They cancel their good boards, and replace all of them with one shit board.

Formac. A stupid company that can't write good drivers until they stumble across them after multiple crappy tries, and has actual Germans rudely failing to help customers. A company that can't include a sensible ReadMe with any ROM update, and that posts ROM updates that can kill some boards if they are incorrectly used.

this is our Macintosh video acceleration market.


03-21-2001, 06:03 AM
maybe since they havent released any retail boards its hard to tell, but how does the prelimenary outlook on nVidea seem to you mag? a step up from ati i hope.

03-21-2001, 12:06 PM
So, I'm holding my new Radeon board here after consulting the forums. A Macguru moderator stated how great they are and then another moderator states the following:

"ATI, a company that can't ship before Christmas, and when it does ship, ships shit. They cancel their good boards, and replace all of them with one shit board. "</p>


03-21-2001, 01:46 PM

One thing I have noticed is that those who are installing Radeon PCI and not replacing another ATI card and also not trying to get two ATI cards to run together, it just seems to work. I had no trouble with my Radeon PCI, it and the myriad of software just worked. But I have no other ATI cards in the box and the Radeon PCI was replacing a Formac ProFormance3+ 32MB card. So it was probably me that you were referring to.

Remember, you must be running OS9 or later, preferably 9.0.4 or 9.1. I have not tried 9.1 with it, only 9.0.4. k

03-21-2001, 02:19 PM
K. Just wondering. Why did you pull out the pro/3+ 32 mb?

[This message has been edited by Tyrosmurf (edited 21 March 2001).]

03-21-2001, 02:29 PM
I bought the Radeon based on 1.)availability, 2.)confidence the company will be around at least a year 3.) recommendations from a Macgurus moderator (do moderators work for Macgurus? Am i the *only "Junior Member" ? http://macgurus.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif ) and 4.)the review of grapics cards in Macworld.

The Formac card got lower ratings from Macworld because of no DVD playback and poor frame rates in 3D.

Big Al
03-21-2001, 04:33 PM
Stay around and post a while longer and you'll become a member. I was a Junior Member until about a month ago.

03-21-2001, 07:01 PM
The Formac ProFormance3+ card tested by Macworld was the 16MB version. I got a deal on the Radeon PCI that I could not refuse. So I just removed the ProFormance3+ 32MB to test the Radeon PCI in my PTP. The PF3+ is now back in my PTP and the Radeon PCI is idling along in my parts bin. I do want to test it with the upgraded drivers and firmware. k

03-21-2001, 07:08 PM
Just out of curiosity. . .with the Radeon. . anyone getting vertical lines that trail behind an object when you drag it across the screen? I know there's a term for this, "artifacts"(?).
Well I do. They stop if you turn off the ATI Graphics Acceleration but start up as soon as you turn the acceleration back on. I have to restart the computer to make them quit (for a while anyway). This is my second Radeon and they both do this.
Reminds me of the IX Micro Twin Turbo cards I was glad to be rid of. What's ironic is I sent a IX Micro TT card to ATI as the "trade up" card for the Radeon.
Is this what they mean by "what goes around comes around"?


03-21-2001, 07:16 PM
I believe the UBB software is setup as per the Gurus to recognize "Members" after a certain amount of posts. Magician? Louie? Another Mod?

And while the Mods may work for the Gurus, most do not (as far as I know) and are not paid, in either case, to work the boards here. It is a volunteer basis. Much like you and I write in, but these kind folks have the collective knowledge of a small, advanced country. In any event, bow to them occasionally and we will all feel better. http://macgurus.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

The Radeon is a great card, in most respects. But for most of us, we own vintage Macs and cannot reap any benefits of DVD-capable cards. We would need a separate card. At this time, I think Wired4DVD is about the only option. Remember that we all have different needs from our video cards. That in itself will be the extreme weirdness you see in some folks remaining attached to older cards vs. newer ones. Sometimes, newer isn't better. At least in some isolated situations.

03-21-2001, 08:32 PM

I'm thinking it is 25 posts where you lose the Junior. Something like that anyway. And no, most of us moderators do not work for MacGurus. In my case, I live in Concord, CA and MacGurus is in DE.

h, I'm beginning to think that the artifacts problem is not the video cards since you are getting the problem with both the TT and Radeon. I have used both in my PTP with no such artifacts, nor artifacts of any kind. I really have no clue why you are getting the artifacts. What is your monitor and model number and what resolution and number of colors and Hz setting are you using and does the manual say the Hz setting is supported for that resolution? k

[This message has been edited by kaye (edited 21 March 2001).]

03-21-2001, 09:24 PM

The artifact problem goes back to my PowerComputing PT166. I purchased a TT and that was my first experience with artifacts. Out with TT, no artifacts. In with Orion, no artifacts.
Everything I've been doing with the Radeon is on a S900 (souped up) that has had Orion and Nexus cards and never an artifact. Until Radeon. I have a new monitor (Samsung 180T) digital flat panel. I used the Nexus card (analog mode) for 2 weeks after I sent the first Radeon back and never encountered any video problem. It's just slower than the Radeon.
Monitor and settings. Samsung 180T, 1280X1024, 60Hz, millions of colors,. This is what it's supposed to be (native?). It's connected digital/digital. I suppose I could try the analog/analog but the reason I got the Samsung and the Radeon was, among other things, the digital interface.
It's obvious to me that Radion has some problems. Be it the software or hardware,
ATI has to fix it. I take some of the blame here for disregarding the rule of "DON'T GET THE FIRST ONE OF ANY THING". My excuse. . . I didn't think ATI would make the public "beta test" their product.


03-22-2001, 12:34 AM
Just to follow up. I installed my Radeon card this evening. I had it in the box in about 5 minutes. Installed the software without a hitch and was up and running.

All I can say is moving from the 4MB built-in video to the Radeon is pleasing. I tested out the new setup with Quake III Arena with the highest resolution settings and it looked and played great.

No trails. Righteous.

03-22-2001, 01:04 AM

Just one more suggestion and then I will butt out. Your Samsung 180T, 1280X1024, 60Hz, millions of colors, can you set higher than 60Hz as one of your recommended settings? If so, can you try that? But I do not recommend trying any Hz not recommended. We have someone who had to replace his monitor after trying a Hz that was not one of the recommended. So be careful. k

03-22-2001, 01:47 AM

Thanks for the feedback. I know at some point I saw a setting slightly higher than 60Hz but I can't tell you what card or software version it was. Whatever it was (65Hz?), I tried it and the monitor seemed to work fine. The artifact problem wasn't happening at that time either.

The problem I'm speaking off has occurred twice (with this card) in say. . .80-100 hours of operation, always when it's been running for at least two hours and it doesn't repeat itself after restart for that session. Oh well, it only happens once every 40 or so hours so it's not like it's the end of the world. Once every 40 hours is once more than Orion or Nexus did. . . . ever. Enough of my pissing and moaning. Perhaps I'll go to ATI tech support and see what they have to say.

Bottom line at this point is I'll continue to use this card, it’s just too good not to. I'm certain that ATI will make improvements and refinements and eventually this cards true potential will be realized.

Jim (h)

03-22-2001, 07:50 AM
I need to apologize for my rant--I have indeed been able to use Radeon successfully in most machines, but it has been a nightmare in my favorite, primary workstation, beast. I need to run a pair of them alongside a Rage 128VR. I am not willing to sacrifice the video and TV capability of the 128VR to run three Radeon.

In most machines, most newer machines, Radeon is plug and play. Granted, I have not attempted to use more than two in any other machine, nor have I attempted to make then coexist peacefully with Rage 128VR in any other machine. Most of the time it works. In my case, installing into a horrifically upgraded 9600 with three 21-inch Hitachis, it hasn't worked correctly to date, and I am livid.

I was running a pair of Nexus and the Rage 128VR, and it worked great. Testing Radeon in other machines, however, I was seduced by the faster scrolling, and better games performance. I rarely play games. Just don't have time. It is on my list of resolutions, however, for the second half of the year, to actually make time to play games again on the Mac. We have a great setup here for Death Match, and my son should be moving out to join me here shortly, so I figured we'd install Radeon in my primary workstation and a couple of the other machines, so we could have three or four folks engaging in digital mayhem across the network. What the heck else is technology for?


So. I am temporarily stuck with two $200 boards that work worse than my Nexus. It's a pain in the butt pulling this 9600 down to the basement, and I hate working on it upstairs in the office. Do I wait for another driver update? Or do I surrender and revert back to dual Nexus?

I'm going to actually (gasp) do a clean-install of MacOS 9.1 myself later this month, I guess....it's been YEARS since I did one, really.....I have built up this system folder repeatedly, and upgraded repeatedly....and it could be that I just need to start fresh. But I doubt it. I am, after all, a Guru, and I know what most of the extensions in the system folder do. Like anyone else, I am annoyed that ATI apparently requires fifteen extensions to do what Formac accomplishes with one or two....but that's been a hallmark of ATI software engineering for a long, long time.

maybe we need to be nicer and invite an ATI guy to come and hang out with us here? Sure would be nice if I knew that someone else in the world was running dual Radeon and a Rage 128VR successfully in a 9600 Mach 5.

anyway....I apologize for my rant. I have been very grouchy the past week.


03-22-2001, 04:15 PM

OK, I'm wondering if the Radeon fan is working or if the temperature inside your box after a couple of hours is just getting too high. You may need a Gurus slot fan to exhaust more air out of the PCI slots area. Just don't configure it so that one card fan faces the intake of the slot fan. The Gurus slot fan cooler is much higher output than any other slot fan I have ever tried. Works great. k

03-22-2001, 07:23 PM
the heat angle occurred to me, as well, K.

03-23-2001, 01:30 AM
Magician and Kaye,

You know the heat angle occurred to me also. It's certainly worth investigating
and I will do so shortly. I know that the temperature of the processor doesn't necessarily give an indication of the temperature of other items in the case but
this G3 processor runs very cool. I seldom see it get over 85F. I have made a
slight "engineering" modification that I believe boosts the air flow through the machine. Too difficult to explain (or to even "sum up") so I'll forward a picture. I'm sure you could all use a good laugh. In the meantime, I'm going to get into the cooling angle let you know what I figure out.
K, thanks for the tip on the slot cooler.

Jim (h)

03-23-2001, 09:32 AM
jim, you are too humble. Please post that pic of your cooling rack here. It's....pretty damned nice.


03-24-2001, 09:48 PM
Having returned my Radeon card after trying unsuccessfully to run it in two XLR8 G4/450 upgraded 9600's I am willing to say Magician doesn't need to apologize for the rant. I agree with it. Some people are dropping Radeons in and they work. I even know a guy who has it running fine with OS 8.6 in a Motorola StarMax. But they didn't work for me and I remember all the times when the Rage Orion cards just started up effortlessly and worked flawlessly. My take on this is one should wait a year until ATI gets it's software act together and then think Radeon again.

03-26-2001, 01:42 AM
I have a G3 upgraded 9500... is anybody interested in finding out how well the radeon performs in it.... if so i will pull the radeon out of my B/W and install in the 9500 for a day..... that is if anybody is interested

03-26-2001, 07:26 AM
hey, it's ok. No need to inconvenience yourself for me. I know what's messed up, and what isn't. I have one last round of testing to complete, then I am unleashing the beast.


I do appreciate your kind offer, however. Thank you.


03-26-2001, 01:28 PM
9man, I would be interested. I tested the Radeon PCI here http://www.macgurus.com/ubb/Forum12/HTML/000061.html (bottom post on the page) with the ver 1.0 driver. If you do the test, tell us what driver version you used. I would like to find some way to squeeze more performance from the card in a vintage Mac. k

03-27-2001, 11:43 AM
I'm interested also. I suffered for two weeks trying to make the Radeon work in my 9600's. It probably was a defective card but I'd like to learn all I can about the rituals necessary to make this thing work! I might get up enough courage to try it again?

03-27-2001, 12:27 PM
Were you trying with other cards installed? I installed mine into an 8500 with no problem. I downloaded the 1.1.1 driver first, discarded the CD, and popped it in. Installed the software and worked like a charm.

03-28-2001, 12:16 AM
i have a g3 upgraded ptp and the radeon worked right out of the gate. i do not have, however any other video cards. i would be interested in trying to get a copy of macbench as i don't have one so comparisons don't do to well. i did run norton sys info and thought the video score should be higher but who knows. if anybody would like to burn a copy of mb5 i would be more than happy to repay with disc or cash.


03-28-2001, 12:44 AM

Email me your name and address. I burned a bunch of MB5 awhile back and have one left. k

03-28-2001, 01:22 AM
For thoes of you interested in my on going Radeon/Xclaim3DPro/PTP Saga:

Aparently, the Radeon does not like having another ATI card around as just having the other card active and nothing else changed will slow it down...



03-28-2001, 02:20 AM
Have you tried using ALL the ATI stuff for both cards at the same time? It may just crash.

03-28-2001, 02:46 AM
I have tried running all the software for both cards and the only things not included with the Radeon 1.1.1 are 2 extensions from the the Apple 9.1 software as far as I can see (MPP Manager, and ATI Driver Update).



03-28-2001, 06:47 PM
Ok ill post the results of my testing this weekend

03-30-2001, 01:24 PM
I don't think the Radeon likes the twin turbo in the Mac 9600 either. I tried to run the Radeon and the TwinTurbo together and when I opened Photoshop it just quit.

03-30-2001, 09:41 PM
well, we may need to get a little more systematic about this, as the Radeon apparently does well in some Tsunamis, like K's....but mr sheep and I are among those who get to suck with them in 9600's.

what the heck do we do now?

I guess once we confirm a few more instances, we can try politely inviting someone from ATI to visit us here. Once that fails, we can embarrass the shit out of them. I'm angry at that company, anyway, and could use a new hobby.

I think reserving and starting up www.ati-sucks.com (http://www.ati-sucks.com) could end up being popular. It may be the only way to get them to pull their heads out of their asses and fix these damned drivers.

03-30-2001, 09:52 PM
I'd like to nominate some other companies for www.xxxxxxxsux.com. (http://www.xxxxxxxsux.com.)

03-31-2001, 12:49 AM
Well, ATI is at the top of my list for the nomination at the moment. I'm so desperate for a working video card that I'm eyeing the used stuff on eBay where all the non working junk in the country is passed on to some poor unsuspecting buyer.

03-31-2001, 05:17 PM
Hey guys

Just installed my new Radeon card in this old PTP 225 and so far so good. After reading this forum I figured I was well advised to pull out the old IMS tt first and then stuck it in that same bottom slot. Love the fast smooth scrolling. Haven't fired up PS yet. I'll have to scrounge around and see if I can find a game demo or something for a shake down -- try and make it smoke.

I don't see any artifacts when dragging.

Anybody know how to get rid of that stupid ATI Config menu in MY menu bar?

Can I throw out the ATI Mac2TV¬ô Monitor (I'd never want my TV talking to my Mac!), and what do I need ATI Rage 128 3D Accelerator for when there's a ATI Radeon 3D Accelerator?

Trying to fight Extension bloat here.

[This message has been edited by Funicular (edited 01 April 2001).]

04-02-2001, 05:59 PM
Ok... Hear is some bechmarks of my 9500 with the RAGE 128 using the radeon 1.1.1 drivers and Mac OS 9.1
400Mhz Metabox G3 CPU
(will post Radeon soon)

Throughput 1.5
This test shows how much data can be pushed through the PCI bus to the video using the CPU, FPU, and copybits

CPU: 26MB/s
FPU: 41.4MB/s
Copybits: 71.4MB/s

Cinemabench 2000
This test if for rendering using the Cinema 4D engine, OpenGL and raytracing with ONE CPU

Shading Cinema4D: 3.49CB
Shading OpenGL: 3.71 GL factor 1.06x
Raytracing Single CPU: 4.74

Norton System Info 3.1.2

Video test


B/W G3 400 w/ Radeon scored 976

[This message has been edited by 9500MAN (edited 03 April 2001).]

04-02-2001, 06:27 PM
For anyone who cares I just found out how to disable the ATI Config menu icon: Hold down Option+C on startup.

04-02-2001, 08:48 PM
Do away with it forever by disabling the ATI control panel and ATI Extension. All the the extension does is drive the control panel.

If you'd just switch to the Apple OpenGL 1.2.1 Update package or newer, you'd have ATI drivers that are months newer and you wouldn't have to put up with that extraneous crap.

04-02-2001, 11:36 PM
Thanks, 9MAN. I will wait for your Radeon tests. k

04-03-2001, 05:46 PM
Here are my radeon results...... Not too impressive http://macgurus.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Norton video test


Throughput 1.5

CPU to Video: 26.1
FPU to Video: 41.7
Copybits: 84.2

Cinemabench 2000

cinema4D: 3.42
OpenGL: 2.65 ran this test twice, same results http://macgurus.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif
raytracing 4.72

Using Mac OS 9.1
Radeon 1.1.1

04-03-2001, 06:51 PM
Well, I don't get it. But tomorrow I'm going to put that Radeon PCI back in the PTP and make a list of all the video inits, not just what the ATI installer installed, and run the Norton and throughput tests, and rerun the Cinema 2000 test, all this with OS9.0.4 and the original Radeon 1.0? stuff.

Then run the ATI updater 1.1.1? and retest all including MB5. I just received the CD for OS9.1 today so that will be the next step, then run the tests again. Will post results. k

04-03-2001, 11:25 PM

OpenGL 1.2.1 is newer than the 9.1 stuff.

04-04-2001, 06:27 PM
Thanks Louie. I noticed that this morning after installing OS9.1. k

04-04-2001, 10:44 PM
Well I think that I have found a decently small ATI Extension set and have not seen any slow downs in 2D. As follows:

ATI Graphics Accelerator v.5.3.4
ATI Radeon 3D Accelerator v.6.2
ATI Rage 128 3D Accelerator v.6.0.1
ATI Resource Manager v.2.8.3
ATI ROM Xtender v.1.0.3
ATI Video Accelerator v.4.6.9
ATI Video Digitizer v.4.3.3

And then Open GL 1.2.1 (with the OpenGLRendererATI v.1.2.3 Extension)

So would it be a fair guess that the "ATI Rage 128" could go as well as the "Video Digitizer" if I'm not running another ATI 128 card or using video in?

Looking better than when first installed, but still messy,

04-04-2001, 11:08 PM
well....I've wrestled with this long enough....I'll have to figure out a way to invite an ATI rep here to assist us. I can get decent performance, about what you'd expect, out of a single Radeon....but two, with a Rage 128VR, are not right in beast. Especially not after dual Nexus were smooth as hot butter.


04-04-2001, 11:34 PM

There is an ATI tech who participates on Breedon's forums.
ATI Technologies


04-05-2001, 12:25 AM
Ok, well one more test before I head to bed...

Radeon and Xclaim in system and active,
Slimmed the Extensions down to:

ATI Graphics Accelerator
ATI Radeon 3D Accelerator
ATI Resource Manager
ATI ROM Xtender
ATI Video Extender

With this set, all my benchmarks went up (Including the Xclaim), the most was Cinebench, went from GL Factor 1.14 to 1.22

I'm reporting specific numbers in my PTP Step-by-step here: http://www.macgurus.com/ubb/Forum12/HTML/000066.html


04-05-2001, 10:48 AM
Ready for one more chapter in the "Radeon Sucks" saga? I returned my first Radeon (PCI, Mac) when I could not get it to work in either of my two mucho upgraded 9600's. Marked it defective. Then, emboldened by the success of others, I bought another one. But rather than try it in the upgraded 9600's I put it in a stock 9600/350 which had only extra RAM added to stock. Nothing else.

Well this 9600 would not come out of a restart with the Radeon card in it (Just like the other two). And the power button in the front would not turn off the power either while it was sitting there in never-never land not coming back from the restart. Have to cut the power at the battery backup and turn it back on to get through a restart.

I called ATI and they agreed to take this one back too. Now, I ask you, did I get a second defective Radeon? Am I just incredibly unlucky? Do I have bad RAdeon Karma? Does the Radeon work in Mac 9600's?

I'd sure be interested to hear from anyone who has gotten this board to work in a Mac 9600. Not that it is going to make me feel much better.

04-06-2001, 01:04 AM
well, Mac, I am running two of them (for a little bit longer, I guess) in a 9600, previously a 9600/350. The third board is a Rage 128VR.

no problems like those that you describe....but 2D acceleration is definitely broken, and it is frustrating because three Rage 128's (one 128VR and dual Nexus) really, really rocked in this machine. I figured I'd get a little more performance out of the Radeons, but what the hell was I thinking?

K. I'll go surf there and search for Arshad and see if I can lure him over here. Sure seems a shame to stick these boards in the basement machines and transition to Formac boards over a driver problem.

04-06-2001, 01:54 AM
ATI can kiss my ass!!!!! The next card I buy will be a Formac card, unless i can find a voodoo5 real cheep... I hope someday somebody registers www.atisucks.com (http://www.atisucks.com) cuz they really do SUCK!!!!!!!!

Whats everybody else think??


WOW!!! www.atisucks.com (http://www.atisucks.com) is under construction!!!!!

[This message has been edited by 9500MAN (edited 06 April 2001).]

04-06-2001, 02:02 AM

I once had that problem in my 9500 after pushing the cuda swich... I took the radeon out and put back the 128 and everything worked fine.... Then i reinserted the radeon and it booted up just fine...... My radeon is in the third PCI slot.... A belkin USB card is in Slot one and the rest are empty
(for now) I am assuming that you tried all the PCI slots with the radeon??

I was running a clean install of OS 9.1 with Radeon 1.1.1 drivers if you still have the card try a clean install with OS 9.1 and Radeon 1.1.1...


04-06-2001, 03:48 AM

Well I think your irritation at ATI is justified. I'm not too happy with my Radeon but I will add this. The Formac card? Been there and done that with the SGI Flat Panel Display and that experience made the Radeon seem like a walk in the park. I shudder when I think back on that. . . . hell, I don't think there is a word for what that was. I had two root canals at time I was battling with the Formac and found I would rather have a root canal (or two) than to duke it out with a Formac. I don't know from the Voodoo. Here's to new and better drivers from ATI. . . soon.


04-06-2001, 04:59 PM
I'm happy as hell with my Radeon. Have to admit. But all I have in my 8500 is a XLR8 upgrade and a 10/100 ethernet card.

If you are looking for a Voodoo 5 card, can't beat Outpost.com

$144.95 and free shipping.

I considered it but decided to go with a company that might respond with new drivers in the future.

Anyone get a Radeon to work with OS X?

04-06-2001, 06:00 PM

Reinstalled the Radeon PCI (Bandit Busmaster slot 4) in my PTP xlr8 G3-540/270/1MB. Both the CD v1.1 installer and the 1.1.1 updater went without a hitch. OpenGL 1.2.1.

2D, MB5, 21" monitor, 1152x870xMillionsx75Hz:
OS9.0.4/v1.1, RadeonPCI Graphics-3024, Pub Graphics-2236 (previously tested)
OS9.1/v1.1,__ RadeonPCI Graphics-3111, Pub Graphics-2255
OS9.1/v1.1.1, RadeonPCI Graphics-3034, Pub Graphics-2217

ThroughPut V1.5, 21" monitor, 1152x870x256x75Hz:
OS9.0.4/v1.1, RadeonPCI 24.0/45.3/89.1
OS9.1/v1.1,__ RadeonPCI 23.9/45.2/85.5
OS9.1/v1.1.1, RadeonPCI 24.0/45.3/85.5

2D, Norton5 System Info, 21" monitor, 1152x870x256x75Hz:
OS9.0.4/v1.1, RadeonPCI Video-640
OS9.1/v1.1,__ RadeonPCI Video-588
OS9.1/v1.1.1, RadeonPCI Video-587

3D, Cinebench 2000 V1.0, 21" monitor, 1024x768xMillionsx75Hz:
OS9.0.4/v1.1, RadeonPCI 4.40/4.92/6.93/1.12x faster (previously tested)
OS9.1/v1.1,__ RadeonPCI 4.52/4.52/6.84/1.00x faster
OS9.1/v1.1.1, RadeonPCI 4.52/5.04/6.77/1.12x faster

NOTE: Runs just fine, but I have no other ATI cards installed and never did. The v1.1.1 updater slows every test down, very disappointing, except for the Cinebench 2000 OpenGL result (5.04). I am going back to v1.1. The Norton5 Video test seems to be very monitor size dependent, also number of colors dependent, but not at all resolution dependent. I don't have a small monitor anymore (deep storage) to test this theory.

I did not try to pare down the Radeon inits, just left them to load.

ATI RADEON PCI INITS, v1.1/v1.1.1:

ATI Displays 2.8.1/2.8.2
ATI Extension 2.8.1/2.8.2
ATI Graphics Accelerator 5.3.3/5.3.4
ATI Mac2TV¬ô Monitor 2.8.1/2.8.2
ATI Radeon 3D Accelerator 6.1.6/6.2
ATI Rage 128 3D Accelerator 6.0.1/6.0.1
ATI Resource Manager 2.8.2/2.8.3
ATI ROM Xtender 1.0.1/1.0.3
ATI Video Accelerator 4.6.9/4.6.9
ATI Video Digitizer 4.3.2/4.3.3

OpenGL 1.2.1 installed by v1.1/v1.1.1:

OpenGLEngine 1.2.1/1.2.1
OpenGLLibrary 1.2.1/1.2.1
OpenGLMemory 1.2.1/1.2.1
OpenGLRenderer 1.2.1/1.2.1
OpenGLRendererATI 1.2.1/1.2.3 <- Note
OpenGLUtility 1.2.1/1.2.1

Last, numerous Apple video/monitor stuff (have no idea if this makes a difference):

All latest QuickTime stuff
All latest QuickDraw 3D stuff
System Monitor Plugins
Text Encoding Converter

Again, I did not pare down any of this, just left it as is. I did my best to get this post as accurate as possible. I also tested my ProFormance3+ 32MB card for almost all of this and will put it together later as a comparison on the PTP step by step.

If anyone has something more to test with this Radeon PCI, I will be leaving it in my PTP for a few more days before the PF3+ goes back in. k

04-07-2001, 02:58 PM
well.....now you guys know why we are titling our updated video pages the Video Pages of Hell.

Formac, let's be honest, really has shown in the past that they can collossally suck. When their boards work, they are wicked fast. But their drivers can be scary, their 3D support lags behind ATI's, and their tech support blows beyond my capacity to verbalize. I mean, if Louie and I had our fingers on triggers we'd be in world war III right now with those rude bastards.

ATI....well, what do you say and think about a company that has three great boards, the Rage 128VR, the Nexus, and the Orion, selling cleanly in the channel for prices ranging from $100 to $250 or so, and then pulls them without even a hint to vendors, abandons the market for weeks, and I mean WEEKS during the crucial Christmas selling season, and then ships only the AGP Radeon first, charging like $275 for it.....and then follows it MONTHS later, NOT WEEKS later, but MONTHS later, with the stupid Radeon PCI?

This seriously tears the ass out of me, not just as a vendor, but as a Mac user, and as a businessman. Hell. As a human governed by commonsense. The stupidity displayed by this company leaves me shaking, unable to even talk.

I mean, no more Rage 128VR? Those boards rocked! There is NO capture/output solution on the market beneath the Fuse at $500, and the VR tv functionality is the best ever distributed, period. But the truly SICK thing is, the same Rage Theatre chip at the heart of the Rage 128VR is ON THE RADEON! Yes! The Radeon COULD deliver the same video capture and tv and video output functionality as the Rage 128VR, along with faster 2D and 3D performance, but NOOOOOOO.....ATI decides it's more important to use precious backplane space for a digital connector that very few people need!

HOLY SHIT. Where's my anger pillow. I need to get medieval on something. This is killing me.

I swear, I could smack the CEO of ATI upside the head! If I am in an elevator with the guy at MacWorld-NY, he will not walk away from me without being bloodily berated; if necessary, I'll make him listen while he's on his knees. I'll put him in a nerve hold and explain to him why he's a friggin' retard, and shouldn't be running home to mama, much less running a huge company.

So now, rather than three separate boards in three separate price ranges with a decent feature set, stable, mature drivers, and really decent performance, we have ONE BROKEN BOARD that won't coexist with the Rage 128VR in the same machine, shits all over itself when used in multiple monitor scenarious, and has drivers that feel like they were compiled by Mr. Krishna's CodeWarrior class at Assbrain Community College.


I was able to get two Radeon to play, somewhat, with a Rage 128VR in Jorge's old rev 1 Yosemite last night. The desktops on the Radeon are corrupted....but the Rage 128VR apparently works fine in the 3.3v 66MHz 32-bit PCI slot....

but there is a lot of work to be done on these drivers. I wish ATI would have left their product line-up alone, and debuted Radeon as a separate product, period. A product for idiots who have time to wait while ATI extracts its head from its ass.


I gotta go watch hockey. Flyers vs Pens. Hopefully there will be a lot of HITTING.

it will make me feel better.

04-07-2001, 07:19 PM


Flyers 4, Pens 3, OT goal in the waning seconds of sudden-death by John LeClair.

I needed that.

AND.....I finally got a videoconferencing connection up between upstairs and downstairs....couldn't make ClearPhone work, probably because I am too stupid....but VideoLink is much simpler and works.

I am disturbed at how much lag there is....my wife commented "it's like NASA talking to the Moon."

Still, she did moon me, and I did see her most-excellent heart-shaped butt across the LAN, so I got that going for me, which is nice.


stupid Radeon cards.

04-08-2001, 01:50 AM
You forgot a couple of things:

I took ATI months or was it years to actually field the Nexus/Orion/VR. The cards were good. I've got them. The dumb bastards only sold them for about a year and a half. Amazing!

Formac! I wish you wouldn't remind me of them. It's not just the arrogant, silent Germans that own it, it's the obnoxious Limey bastards in London that work for them and the know-nothings in LA. They all suck! They can't even tell you what their released updates are for.

04-08-2001, 04:37 AM
"They can't even tell you what their released updates are for."

If that doesn't sum it up, I don't know what would.

I remember that damned delay shipping Radeon....I remember, plain as day, holding an ATI Rage 128VR in my HANDs at MacWorld in San Francisco.....and playing with them, loving the feature set....TALKING to the Macintosh product manager.....and he told me, I'll never forget, "we have to give Apple their little exclusive, so they get them first....then we'll ship. Probably in April."

How about friggin' JULY, like a day AFTER the next MacWorld? And that was for the Orion, the low-end board, if my memory is correct....with Nexus next, in August/September.....and I don't think Rage 128VR shipped until Oct/Nov, almost a YEAR after they were first demo'd in San Francisco.

In the meantime, we had garbage boards from MacTell, and ixMicro was dying, trying to get people buy the stupid MacRocket...and 3Dfx was entering the fray. No one could foresee that 3Dfx would get bought out. I mean, it looked like they might actually save the Mac video market.

It kills me that I have to write this, and overhaul the video pages in this frame of mind.

oh, well.

Flyers vs Sabres, 3PM EST, Sunday. I will be there.


04-08-2001, 02:53 PM
Here's something to make you all feel better. I took the one Radeon card I still had here out on the roof (17th floor) where I can see, from my edge of Manhattan, New Jersey, in all it's glory, across the Hudson River, held the Radeon by one corner, pulled back, and spun it like a frisbee out into thin air with all my might and with nothing but New Jersey and the Hudson River to receive it.

You will be gratified to know the damned thing didn't make it across the river. Radeon fails the final test!

But wait? Maybe we need a Radeon Voodoo discussion. If all you have to do is put it in your computer three times, try every slot, every combination of drivers and other PCI cards, and every Mac OS, then maybe there is light at the end of the tunnel. All we have to do is make up a flow chart of the multiple possibilities owners can try in order to get it to work. And, Viola!

04-09-2001, 04:07 PM
dude, I really hope you didn't throw that $200 frisbee into the water!

we all know it's drivers that are the problem....not the hardware, per se, right?



...counting pennies to see how many Permedia3 boards I want to bring in-house......and how many of those friggin' Formac Studios I want to afford.

04-09-2001, 09:06 PM
Hey, I am looking at the ATI Nexus. Anyone used it? What are the advantages of the Nexus over the Orion? Is it worth twice as much?

04-10-2001, 12:24 PM
Also, wanted to ask, how do I unistall ATI drivers v. 1.1.1? I used these drivers for the Rage Orion card in my XLR8 G4/450 upgraded Mac 9600 (That is what ATI recommends) and I suspected things were running slowly. Then I read Kaye's report on the 1.1.1 drivers slowing things down and I want to remove them. Do I just start with extensions off and drop those ATI suckers, all of them, in the trash? And then reinstall the older 1.1 version? How about the Open GL stuff. Is it OK to leave them in?

04-10-2001, 02:38 PM
The ATI RAGE 128 NEXUS is the same as the ORION, except the Nexus has 32MB of RAM. This is only good for 3D apps (not games). I consider the RAGE128 barely fast enough to play games. I have a RAGE PRO AGP in my G4/466 - its ok, up to 800x600 @ 32bit, but that is about it.

I tried running the RADEON PCI with the stock 9.1 drivers. It did not work - and it started locking up my system right after boot. I then installed the 1.1.1 drivers and everything is fine. The Radeon does seem to have odd screen redraws... its not all that slower - and 3D is DEFINATELY faster, but I really like the FSAA of the V5. Even at 800x600 - 2x FSAA on the V5 looks better than 1024x768 on the RADEON. For some reason UT will not go past 1024x768 in RAVE mode. I may try to go with the OpenGL version, but I hear that can take 400MB+ and I only have 384, but I should get my 256MB ACME DIMM soon.

It will probably take ATI another 18 months to perfect the RADEON drivers. At least they are much more stable than the first release of the RAGE128 drivers.

04-10-2001, 03:43 PM
on some machines.

there may be an uninstall option in the 1.1.1 installer.

04-10-2001, 04:44 PM
Magician...you are a Flyers fan eh?

The Czech will stand on his head come Wednesday.

....and here I thought I was the only Mac hacking Flyers fan. http://macgurus.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

04-11-2001, 10:19 AM
PENDRAGON, Do you mean having 32 MB RAM on the video board won't make screen redraws faster (Than the Orion) in photoshop? Or make the computer feel quicker? I apologize for my ignorance. Trying to understand video here. I always thought 32 MB was automatically better in general? If you say not I will forget the Nexus.

04-11-2001, 12:10 PM
There seems to be a lot of problems with the Radeon. What would be the best card to use for speed in graphics apps like photoshop, illustrator, pagemaker, etc, especially for redraw in photoshop? Mac is a G3/350 with 896 MB ram, OS 8.6. The current card used is the stock ATY,Rage128y that came with it. How much of a difference in speed could changing cards actually make?



04-11-2001, 09:26 PM
Nothing wrong with the card you have. The Radeon would be slightly faster in 2D. About the only shipping choice is Formac which is lots faster in 2D. See Kaye's recent tests under Power Tower Pro I believe.

04-11-2001, 09:57 PM
Of course it's not shipping anymore but this seems like a good point to lament the loss of the 3Dfx Voodoo5 (and preproduction Voodoo6) boards. I have the V5 in my 9600 and it rocks. 2D and 3D. Very competitive with the remaining players. It is a real shame that 3Dfx bellied up.

04-12-2001, 08:59 AM
I'm interested to know what ATI put in the RAdeon card that improved it over the Nexus 128?

04-12-2001, 01:16 PM

ATI put the new Radeon chipset on the Radeon to make it faster... ;-)

Seriously, the Nexus 128 was based on the Rage128 chipset. Like everything else, the Radeon chipset has more modern features (i.e texture and lighting, charisma, et al) and is just plain faster. Like CPU's, the GPU's speed is constantly increasing, although I remember seeing a growth graph comparing the two and GPUs are getting faster 2 to 3 times quicker than CPU's.

There is a simpe reson for this though. The GPUs handle very specific instructions and basically do the same thing over and over again. So as the cards get faster they can do the "same" task much quicker. This is opposed to CPUs which need to be able to do a wide varity of tasks so it is slower to get quicker in everything it has to do.


04-12-2001, 07:02 PM
Louie & Gurus,

Thanks for the info about the Formac. Apparently from the posts and info I've read on the Gurus' site, it would be the card of choice to coexist with the original ATY,Rage128y that came with the G3/350. I couldn't find Kaye's results of how much faster it would actually be in 2D...could it be as much as 200% when redrawing in Photoshop? Is there a substantial difference in speed of redraw between the plus model and the regular?

For a 2 monitor set up, which card should go in the 66 mHz PCI slot? The idea is to have a screaming card to redraw in Photoshop and other graphics apps, while having a second monitor to use for pallates, etc. I've read some warnings here about stuff that can go wrong. Besides pestering you guys to death after ordering the card, is there a definitive article on exactly what to do step by step based on what system it is going into? I've never done anything like this before.



04-12-2001, 07:48 PM
Kaye's test, dated 6 April is here http://www.macgurus.com/ubb/Forum12/HTML/000061.html .

[This message has been edited by Louie (edited 12 April 2001).]

04-13-2001, 12:16 PM

The Gurus offers three Formac cards:
Formac ProFormance3 16MB Video Accelerator $194.99 ea, Formac ProFormance3 plus 16MB Video Accelerator $264.99 ea, and Formac ProFormance3 plus 32MB w ProCyber Glasses $389.99 ea, here http://www.macgurus.com/shoppingcart/showrampage.cgi?mgvideoadapters7.html .

For a detailed description and comparison of the cards go here http://www.formac.com/2k/products/pf3_products.html

There are differences. k

[This message has been edited by kaye (edited 13 April 2001).]

04-14-2001, 08:16 PM
generally, I think you should leave your stock card in the 66MHz PCI slot, if you have a Yose or Yikes....and definitely leave your AGP card in your AGP slot if you have a Sawtooth. I don't see any board on the market at this time delivering performance or features so good that they justify pulling a stock AGP video card--unless you got a broken nVidia from Apple and are fed up with it.

the Czech got beat, fair and square, two in a row.

I almost can't talk.

A Flyers fan? Well, you could say that.

you could also say that I like Macs.

what you wouldn't be saying is that I make my living messing around with Macs, and have, for several years.

we're sick about the Flyers over here.


04-15-2001, 02:24 AM
A very long and detailed GeForce2MX vs. Radeon comparison here http://innermac.com/features/g2mx-radeon/ and Radeon AGP comes out very much better. BTW, the ProFormance3 tested was a 16MB version, not even a ProFormance3+ in either the 16MB or 32MB versions, in a PCI slot of course. A ProFormance3+ 32MB card would be much closer to the GeForce2MX but could not touch the Radeon AGP, least I don't think so. k

04-16-2001, 02:02 PM
Yes, the Czech got beat by the elder Czech. Oh well, remember the Penguin series last year.

I too am a Flyers fan (Eagles and Sixers too) and also make my living off of supporting a network of 700 Macintoshes. At work, we buy NEw, at home, I'm cheap. http://macgurus.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

04-16-2001, 02:09 PM
For those of you who have been folowing my Radeon Rants..... I just got a new Radeon back from ATI and they said the one I sent them tested defective. And it behaved the same as the one I sent on a trip over the river. So I looks like I did get two defective Radeon cards in a row. Now my problem is mustering the courage to install the one they just sent me. I get anxiety attacks just thinking about it.

04-16-2001, 02:55 PM
PENDRAGON, Do you mean having 32 MB RAM on the video board won't make
screen redraws faster (Than the Orion) in photoshop?
From what I've done and read, no - unless the ATI drivers allow the card to cache the page. I am no Photoshop jock/expert. For 2D video you really do not need much VRAM. For an actually display of 1600x1200x32bits only takes 1,920,000pixelsX32bits/pixel=61,440,000bits * 8bytes/bit = 7,680,000bytes or about 7.68MB of VRAM (where 1000Bytes = 1KB and 1000KB = 1MB). Of course your desktop patter may add a few KB and a desktop pic could add a few hundred KB and then you could have font caching etc... but I still dont think that would be more than a few MB. So if you are running at this res or lower 16MB should be fine.

I apologize for my ignorance. Trying to understand video here. I always thought 32 MB was automatically better in general? If you say not I will forget the Nexus.

Few things are automatic. Like others have said the newer chips are better. I think the original RAGE128 ran at 90Mhz GPU/VRAM. The RAGEPRO128 brought this up to about 110Mhz GPU/VRAM. The V3 runs at 166Mhz GPU/VRAM and the V5 is similar but has double the VRAM per GPU and has two GPUs (or 3D only). The RADEON PCI/AGP in the Mac runs at 166Mhz also for the GPU, but the VRAM is 166MHz DDR-RAM (for double data rate). This makes the 'effecitive' speed of the VRAM at 333Mhz. In addition to this ATI has added Hyper-Z to the drivers (and hardware I guess) that allow it to use bandwidth more efficently, by about 10 or 20% - I think this only applies to 3D, but then you need some SERIOUS bandwidth in 3D anyway. I think ATI also added more transistors dedictated to decoded DVD - so the CPU is less on the RADEON than the RAGE128/PRO. There was a RAGE128 with a dedicated hardware decoder however - this was the best (fastest) DVD solution and only ate up about 10% of the CPU when playing DVD. So my friends 300MHz Yosemite with Hardware dvd decode is actually faster at playing DVDs than my PB400/2K - even though my processor is 33% faster.

Drivers also play a roll...

For the price of an old Nexus32MB you could get a RADEON with the same amount of memory but it is actually 2 generations - that is ATI skipped the card inbetween the RAGEPRO and the RADEON.

04-17-2001, 12:06 AM
oh my God.


helping you mentally, ms. We'll have to fire up the air raid siren before you launch another Radeon attack against New Jersey, though.


well....talking about the Pens series last year....wouldn't you know it? Last year's hero, Andy Delmore, scored the game winner in a critical game yet again, this year.

I will never forget game 5 against the Pens last year. I went to the FUC, spent hundreds on the tix....and watched Delmore score the trick as I was dining on filet and swilling fine wine in the Victor's Club.

I looked at my pal, and we just laughed. Never, ever again, will we be chilling in the Victor's Club when the Flyers blow out the Pens in the playoffs.


well, tomorrow is what? Game four?

I'll be there.


[This message has been edited by magician (edited 17 April 2001).]

04-19-2001, 01:07 PM
I won't even consider an ATI card until the drivers are fixed. Unreal Tournament on the Radeon = trouble. Voodoo 5s are cheaper than the Radeon, have 4x FSAA (not 2x FSAA which the Radeon can supposedly do, but does not even exist until they put it in new drivers), look great with Glide, and have better drivers. I'd reccommend to someone just to stick with a 3Dfx card despite they nolonger exist, for the speed, quality, and stability.

04-19-2001, 05:32 PM
So. . . do I really want to try the 3dfx 5500 or not? I'm using a Radeon in an S900 with a Samsung 180T digital monitor (the digital is a must) and although the Radeon works (after a fashion) I'd like to know if going with the 3dfx would make any sense at all.

Yo. . . macsheep, have you tried the new Radeon card ATI sent you?


04-21-2001, 12:17 PM
You are probably just fine with your Radeon card, its supported under OSX too. But after having the eye candy from the Voodoo 5 in Unreal Tournament, it would seem like a downgrade for me to get a Radeon. Anyways, ATI is supposed to release the Radeon SE or dual processor or 64MB Radeon or something like that this summer. The Radeon PCI will already be "obsolete"

04-21-2001, 06:42 PM
No. Haven't tried the new Radeon. Rage Orions are working just fine in my 9600's. I will probably sit on the other Radeon until it is obsolete. Computers that don't work equal stress for me. I would rather bury the money than get whacked out over another messed up 9600. I have other things I need to do. (I need to do some work with computers instead of always working on computers).

Some guy paid $195.00 for a Nexus on eBay the other day. I only paid $154. (With the rebate) for the Radeon. So, it it is a $200 obsolete Nexus or a Radeon that may or may not but probably won't work versus an Orion that I know works. I'm standing pat. You have to know when to hold 'em and know when to fold 'em!

Boy, the flyers suck this year, eh? Hope Magician doesn't take it too hard. He could be a NY Rangers fan, if that is any consolation.

04-22-2001, 01:36 AM
yeah, hockey season is over for me, now. I'll watch the Cup Finals, but the Flyers almost broke my heart this year.

oh, well. I got a Summer to heal and get ready for next October. I just hope Bob Clarke makes some decent trades this off-season.

I almost feel bad for the Flyers. Philly fans show no mercy.


04-27-2001, 07:58 PM
I still have a new Radeon video card here and a 9600 without a video card. I also have a couple of Orions left. If I put that Radeon in a fully upgraded and fully functional 9600 I fear it will set me back a weeks work. Do you have any advice for a poor 9600 user who is terrified of Radeon video cards?

04-29-2001, 03:56 AM
the Radeon should be ok in the 9600 when used by itself. I can't tell you it will be happy with a Rage 128 also installed.

I refuse to use a triple Radeon config in my beast because I want to use the Rage 128VR for watching tv while I work. Dual Radeon with a Rage 128VR blows, IME. Dual Nexus with Rage 128VR was far superior.

04-30-2001, 10:49 PM
I wish I would've looked at this page before I bought my PCI Radeon card.

I've got an original beige G3/233 desktop w/224 meg RAM that I've had to remove the Radeon card from just so I can get it to work.

So, is it a defective card, or just a defective company?

I've tried so many different ways to get this thing to run w/o crashing, it isn't funny.

Any ideas? I don't have the Hudson to throw it into, just a little river called the Rogue. (:

05-02-2001, 02:14 PM

Boy has this topic been beat to death. A couple of things I found to be crucial. You have to install the software after the card is installed AND
the software has to be installed with the extensions off. Call me crazy but until this card, I would grumble about "these software people are too stupid. . . don't they know you can't install software with the extensions off cause the CD-ROM doesn't work without it’s extension?".

Then it occurred to me. If I made a folder on the desktop and placed software from the CD in it , I could install the software with the extensions off.
When all is said and done, I find the Radeon to be lacking in some areas but it's the ATI card that works the best with my monitor.

As far as a defective card?? Maybe.

05-03-2001, 09:39 AM
Yeh, I know it's been beat too death.... I appreciate your input anyway.
I got the extensions off ok, however now I can't even start the computer even with extensions off if the Radeon card is installed.

Sounds like a defective board even to tech support. So...I'll be packin' it off to be repaired/replaced.......

05-03-2001, 01:16 PM
definitely defective...assuming you had it seated completely into the slot. You have to press real hard.