ATI X800 - hardware or software problem ?

I'm having problems with a used X800 graphics card that I
bought online. Both the seller and the sticker say it's an X800
SE card, but Windows sees it as an X800GT. Brand unknown, and
it came without a driver CD.

It occasionally displays a few thin, dotted, regularly spaced
vertical lines on the POST screen and on the disk check screen
after an improper shutdown, but not at any other time. Normally
I'd take this as a sign that the card is defective, probably
the RAM. But there's no display problem after bootup with the
basic Windows display driver at all settings from 640x480 to
1280x768 at 32-bit color. Office apps and simple 2D games run
normally.

It's only when the ATI driver is installed that I get artefacts,
the computer hangs and/or restartes by itself. I've tried both
Catalyst versions 6.7 and 7.2, with the same result.

I tried the card on two different computers. One is a Sempron
64 2500+, Asrock K8VM890 mobo, single PATA HDD. It runs fine
with an X700 Pro card. The second computer is an A64 3000+, MSI
K8NGM2 mobo, single SATA HDD.

Neither computer has any PCI expansion card. Both are Win XP
SP2, DX9c.

Some time ago, I had trouble installing a GeForce 4 Ti4200 card
on a friend's computer with a VIA-based motherboard. It turned
out that this particular card needed to have the VIA AGP driver
installed and then uninstalled (not just NOT installed), *and*
a very specific nVidia driver installation sequence.

The seller of the X800 SE/GT has agreed to a return and refund,
but I wanted to make sure that the card *is* defective. I was
wondering if this card has some finicky requirements similar to
those of the Ti4200. Suggestions will be appreciated.

> I'm having problems with a used X800 graphics card that I
> bought online. Both the seller and the sticker say it's an X800
> SE card, but Windows sees it as an X800GT. Brand unknown, and
> it came without a driver CD.
>
> It occasionally displays a few thin, dotted, regularly spaced
> vertical lines on the POST screen and on the disk check screen
> after an improper shutdown, but not at any other time. ,,,,

What you have is a card that has been flashed with different BIOS.
http://www.techpowerup.com/bios/
The problem is that the default GPU/Mem clock speed to too high for your
card. You can either flash the correct BIOS or use ATITool to change the
clock speed each time you start up.

<pjdd@rediffmail.com> wrote in message
news:1181452914.331048.113390@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> I'm having problems with a used X800 graphics card that I
> bought online. Both the seller and the sticker say it's an X800
> SE card, but Windows sees it as an X800GT. Brand unknown, and
> it came without a driver CD.

An X800SE should have an R420 core with 8 Pipes. Depending on the
manufacturer, and whether it's AGP or PCI-e, there's different stock GPU
core speeds, from 400 to 450Mhz, and different memory types , memory speeds
and 128bit and 256bit versions. The one thing they all have in common is the
R420 and 8 pipes. If you can post the manufacturer/model I can tell you what
it should be running at stock clocks. You can use Everest Home to see what
it's actually running at versus what it should be. Both the SE and GT
version have 8 pipes, but a GT should have a R423 / R480 core with 475Mhz
speed with 493Mhz (986 effective) memory. There's a also crippled X800GT AIW
with 128bit memory and slow 400Mhz core / 490 memory.

On Jun 11, 12:47 am, "Augustus" <no_...@nowhere.net> wrote:
> <p...@rediffmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1181452914.331048.113390@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>
> > I'm having problems with a used X800 graphics card that I
> > bought online. Both the seller and the sticker say it's an X800
> > SE card, but Windows sees it as an X800GT. Brand unknown, and
> > it came without a driver CD.
>
> An X800SE should have an R420 core with 8 Pipes. Depending on the
> manufacturer, and whether it's AGP or PCI-e, there's different stock GPU
> core speeds, from 400 to 450Mhz, and different memory types , memory speeds
> and 128bit and 256bit versions. The one thing they all have in common is the
> R420 and 8 pipes. If you can post the manufacturer/model I can tell you what
> it should be running at stock clocks. You can use Everest Home to see what
> it's actually running at versus what it should be. Both the SE and GT
> version have 8 pipes, but a GT should have a R423 / R480 core with 475Mhz
> speed with 493Mhz (986 effective) memory. There's a also crippled X800GT AIW
> with 128bit memory and slow 400Mhz core / 490 memory.

Thanks, and to Kent_Diego too. I thought nobody was going to
come up with any helpful reply. I'll follow up on your
suggestions tomorrow as I'd already removed the card and it's
getting on to 3 AM here.

I belatedly recalled the seller's statement that it's a Dell
card and downloaded their driver for this card. I'll also try
that tomorrow and report back here.

On Jun 11, 2:21 am, p...@rediffmail.com wrote:
> On Jun 11, 12:47 am, "Augustus" <no_...@nowhere.net> wrote:
>
>
> > <p...@rediffmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:1181452914.331048.113390@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > I'm having problems with a used X800 graphics card that I
> > > bought online. Both the seller and the sticker say it's an X800
> > > SE card, but Windows sees it as an X800GT. Brand unknown, and
> > > it came without a driver CD.
>
> > An X800SE should have an R420 core with 8 Pipes. Depending on the
> > manufacturer, and whether it's AGP or PCI-e, there's different stock GPU
> > core speeds, from 400 to 450Mhz, and different memory types , memory speeds
> > and 128bit and 256bit versions. The one thing they all have in common is the
> > R420 and 8 pipes. If you can post the manufacturer/model I can tell you what
> > it should be running at stock clocks. You can use Everest Home to see what
> > it's actually running at versus what it should be. Both the SE and GT
> > version have 8 pipes, but a GT should have a R423 / R480 core with 475Mhz
> > speed with 493Mhz (986 effective) memory. There's a also crippled X800GT AIW
> > with 128bit memory and slow 400Mhz core / 490 memory.
>
>
> I belatedly recalled the seller's statement that it's a Dell
> card and downloaded their driver for this card. I'll also try
> that tomorrow and report back here.- Hide quoted text -
>
I've tried installing the drivers I downloaded last night. Cat
7.5 seems to be slightly better than 7.2. The desktop comes up
OK, but has trouble redrawing when I open software, even the
Start button. It's even worse with the Dell driver - the
screen blacks out permanentlty before it shows the desktop.

MS error message say that it's probably caused by the X800 SE
driver. I once got a BSOD where it said that the culprit is
the file ati2dvag and that the device driver got stuck in an
infinite loop.

As I said earlier, there's no problem when the basic Windows
driver is used, or in Safe Mode.

I have little experience with ATI-based cards. What does all
this indicate to you ATI gurus ?

I got these readings with Everest :

GPU = X800 SE (R423)
0.13 micron
GPU clock = 425 MHz
RAMDAC clock = 400 MHz
RAM = GDDR3 at 350 MHz, 256-bit

If the GPU chart I downloaded somewhere is accurate, these
readings appear to contradict each other.

X800 SE => R420, R423 => X800 GT
0.13 micron => SE
GDDR3 => GT

This is becoming more confusing - and interesting. Did Dell
overclock a GT and called it an SE ? Did they mess with the
card BIOS so that it won't work properly with a non-Dell
motherboard ?

> I have little experience with ATI-based cards. What does all
> this indicate to you ATI gurus ?
>
> I got these readings with Everest :
>
> GPU = X800 SE (R423)
> 0.13 micron
> GPU clock = 425 MHz
> RAMDAC clock = 400 MHz
> RAM = GDDR3 at 350 MHz, 256-bit
>
> If the GPU chart I downloaded somewhere is accurate, these
> readings appear to contradict each other.
>
> X800 SE => R420, R423 => X800 GT
> 0.13 micron => SE
> GDDR3 => GT
>
> This is becoming more confusing - and interesting. Did Dell
> overclock a GT and called it an SE ? Did they mess with the
> card BIOS so that it won't work properly with a non-Dell
> motherboard ?


That is very odd....an R423 should be an X800GT, and but those are VERY slow
memory clocks and GPU is as low as it gets. The clockings match a straight
X800, but that should have an R430. GDDR3 clocked at 350Mhz is unheard of.
It's likely some Dell OEM bizarre mixture. They're notorious for selling
great sounding video cards with subpar clockings.

On Jun 11, 11:04 pm, "Augustus" <no_...@nowhere.net> wrote:
> > I have little experience with ATI-based cards. What does all
> > this indicate to you ATI gurus ?
>
> > I got these readings with Everest :
>
> > GPU = X800 SE (R423)
> > 0.13 micron
> > GPU clock = 425 MHz
> > RAMDAC clock = 400 MHz
> > RAM = GDDR3 at 350 MHz, 256-bit
>
> > If the GPU chart I downloaded somewhere is accurate, these
> > readings appear to contradict each other.
>
> > X800 SE => R420, R423 => X800 GT
> > 0.13 micron => SE
> > GDDR3 => GT
>
> > This is becoming more confusing - and interesting. Did Dell
> > overclock a GT and called it an SE ? Did they mess with the
> > card BIOS so that it won't work properly with a non-Dell
> > motherboard ?
>
> That is very odd....an R423 should be an X800GT, and but those are VERY slow
> memory clocks and GPU is as low as it gets. The clockings match a straight
> X800, but that should have an R430. GDDR3 clocked at 350Mhz is unheard of.
> It's likely some Dell OEM bizarre mixture. They're notorious for selling
> great sounding video cards with subpar clockings.- Hide quoted text -
>

350 MHz is the basic clock frequency. That would be 700 MHz
effective at DDR. I'd really like to pursue this further,
partly because I got this card cheap and would like to keep it,
and partly because it's technically interesting. But I can't
delay returning it much longer.

On Jun 11, 11:04 pm, "Augustus" <no_...@nowhere.net> wrote:

> It's likely some Dell OEM bizarre mixture. They're notorious for selling
> great sounding video cards with subpar clockings.
>

Maybe they make a habit of buying subpar chips in bulk at
heavily discounted prices and underclock them ?

> 350 MHz is the basic clock frequency. That would be 700 MHz
> effective at DDR. I'd really like to pursue this further,
> partly because I got this card cheap and would like to keep it,
> and partly because it's technically interesting. But I can't
> delay returning it much longer.

Unless you paid in the $20 range, I'd return it. It's got crappy specs,
quite possibly some hardware issues, and it's certainly not an X800GT, and
with those specs you found out, it's not even up to X800SE levels of
perfromance. There's way better out there for inexpensive used AGP cards.

On Jun 12, 3:16 am, "Augustus" <no_...@nowhere.net> wrote:
>
> Unless you paid in the $20 range, I'd return it. It's got crappy specs,
> quite possibly some hardware issues, and it's certainly not an X800GT, and
> with those specs you found out, it's not even up to X800SE levels of
> perfromance. There's way better out there for inexpensive used AGP cards.

I sent the card back today. I paid much more than US$20 for it
- something like the equivalent of US$58 plus shipping. That
probably sounds ridiculously high to you. (It was a PCI-E card
BTW).

But to put things in perspective : I live in a remote place
(not the US) where a 7600GT/256MB costs US$180-200 and a used
6600GT/128MB goes for about $100-120. By those standards, $58
for a working X800 SE would have been a good price.

In any case, I spent all that time on the card largely because
its behaviour intrigued me and I wanted to find out if it was
really a hardware defect.

Thanks for your input.