ATI Radeon 9200 + Mac OS 9.2.2

[Nameci]

Where can I dl your famous System folder? I will try to change res even when extensions are off.

Here you have:
http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php/topic,3176.0.html

First try this System folder with the extensions enabled. You will find that everything works ok, including 2D/3D acceleration, and you could even switch resolutions with the extensions off. But you'll never ever can set 1360x768 in Mac Os 9.

@MacTron,

You are right, that system folder is bullet proof.

Initially, I booted with extensions off and change the resolution to a lower resolution of 1280x720 and rebooted normally. Yahoo! it booted well into the desktop, but it froze, though mouse cursor can be moved, but could not clicked menu. I rebooted again to extensions off and copied extensions manager control panel from my previous OS9 and pasted it on the Extensions folder, and by process of elimination discovered Quicktime 3D Rave as causing the freeze.

But you are wrong, it is now working on 1360x768.

[MacOS Plus]

  The available resolutions should be determined almost entirely by the card itself in tandem with what it recognizes about the monitor via the sense pins (VGA/ADC-analog), EDID (DVI/ADC-digital/HDMI), or similar methods for TV-out adapters, but it will also only allow resolutions and refresh rates the video card is itself capable of.  As an example, most of my Mac video cards are old enough to not support 16:9 ratios or other odd combinations.  Oddly enough there was one Nubus card ever that was actually supposed to be capable of 1920x1080, but perhaps I'm drifting off topic there.

@Nameci: Did acceleration enable with MacTron's boot image?  Can you post a screen shot of the device profile in the ATI Displays window so I can see more detail of your card than System Profiler gave?

[Nameci]

Nope ATI Graphic Acceleration is not enabled, hence, the "X" sign on the icon during extensions load.

[DieHard]

To avoid your next headache, One Last tidbit, as discussed here...
http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php/topic,2700.msg17355.html#msg17355

One Important note is that only the Lucite (clear plastic) version of the 23" will do 1900X1200 in OS 9, the aluminum 23" Cinema will NOT go that high in OS 9, only in X

[Mat]

it is now working on 1360x768.

So did we have a monitor issue, or a driver issue? Is Mac OS 9 as the 9200 innocent as I told the whole time?!
I expect appropriate exculpation from all involved gentleman. Otherwise I have to demand satisfaction in a duel, Saturday at sunrise. Weapons will be the 68k Macs we own, that we are throwing at each other. ;-p

[Nameci]

I have tried to install 3 flavors of installers from here.
1. Mac OS 9.2.2 Universal Install ISO
- updated ATI Drivers as per suggestion and procedure of @Mat
- cannot get to desktop due to "out of range"
- can only get to desktop if booted with extensions off
- cannot change resolution using Monitor control panel when extensions are off
- can get to desktop with 23" Alu ACD

2. Mac OS 9.2.2 Universal Drag Install
- updated ATI Drivers as per suggestion and procedure of @Mat
- cannot get to desktop due to "out of range"
- cannot change resolution using Monitor control panel when extensions are off
- can only get to desktop if booted with extensions off
- can get to desktop with 23" Alu ACD

3. MacTron's bullet proof system folder from MacTron's Rescue and Install CD
- can get to desktop at full resolution in both 23" ACD and PC monitor with extensions on but froze on PC monitor, cannot click menus but can move mouse
- can change resolution with Monitor control panel when extensions are off
- freezing desktop was caused by Quicktime 3D Rave extension, can get to desktop at full res 1360x768 using PC monitor after removal of extension

Now the question, what are the differences between this 3 installers and what is it that makes it boot to full resolution? That I have to dig in further...

[Nameci]

Will somebody explain to me what have just happened?

I have to give the credit to @Mat.

Just now, I have freshly installed 9.2.2 with drag install method. What the heck, I have plenty of time, might as well play with install and see what will happen, might discover something new. Booted first to extensions off, removed all ATI extensions and install drivers from 2005, updated it and rebooted. You know what, it booted up to desktop at 1360x768, my monitor's full resolution and froze. But of course, I know what is causing it, QuickDraw 3D Rave. Booted again to extensions off, made a copy of the settings thru extensions manager and turned off QuickDraw 3D Rave. Rebooted normally, and there I have a full functioning desktop at full resolution.

Thanks to all the good people here who have helped me one way or another thru comments and suggestions to make it happen. I owe you all a pint. Cheers

@MacOS Plus, I cannot open the ATI Displays windows for some reason. I think ATI Graphics Acceleration should be enabled to do this. Mine is greyed out.

[MacTron]

@MacTron,

You are right, that system folder is bullet proof.

Initially, I booted with extensions off and change the resolution to a lower resolution of 1280x720 and rebooted normally. Yahoo! it booted well into the desktop, but it froze, though mouse cursor can be moved, but could not clicked menu.

This system folder is so simple, optimized  and "bullet proof" that you should disable extensions just dragging them out of the System folder, not using another extension that can cause troubles at some point ( the extension manager ) to doing actually nothing.

I rebooted again to extensions off and copied extensions manager control panel from my previous OS9 and pasted it on the Extensions folder, and by process of elimination discovered Quicktime 3D Rave as causing the freeze.

That's a weird problem. May be this issue was discussed here in the past if my memory serves ...

But you are wrong, it is now working on 1360x768.

Sorry for the inconvenience. But I'm glad to learn something new

[Mat]

Well, seems my joke above wasn´t that funny this time, ...

But back on topic. The issue is still strange to me. I suspected the whole time that it shoudl work, butt somehow it didn´t. Don´t know what is different at the other installations, as I never tried them.

Glad that is is working well now. BTW, if we don´t have it already, here is a collection of all ATI Mac drivers: http://gona.mactar.hu/ATI_Mac/

And, MacTron isn´t that wrong as well. ATI never claimed that your special resolution is possible: http://www.cnet.com/products/ati-radeon-9200-mac-edition-pci-128mb/specs/

So as long as we didn´t have the proove from somebody like you, there still was a real chance that it will not work with the best resolution for you. For me the question is now what resolutions are really possible with different cards. I know there are some good 2d cards out there (like the Matrox) that are superior in providing crazy seldom resolutions like yours.

And finally, MacOS Plus also had a lot of interresting points, and has a high level of knowledge about Macs. Very interresting, and still some new points for me!

[MacTron]

So did we have a monitor issue, or a driver issue? Is Mac OS 9 as the 9200 innocent as I told the whole time?!
I expect appropriate exculpation from all involved gentleman. Otherwise I have to demand satisfaction in a duel, Saturday at sunrise. Weapons will be the 68k Macs we own, that we are throwing at each other. ;-p

I'll accept the duel if we can throw each others any kind of Intel inside computers instead of our beloved 68k Macs.
 

[Nameci]

  Could you post the device profile information from the view in the ATI Displays window also?  I'd like to give you a complete comparison against my card.  I can already tell you that yours has a slightly older ROM version.

I have updated the ROM via OSX ROM updater.

ATI Displays on the OS9 won't open. So, I rebooted to OSX and took this screenshot. After the ROM update, still no ATI Graphic Acceleration.


Btw, posting this via Classilla.

[Nameci]

Ladies and Gentlemen, I am happy to announce that I have now enabled graphics acceleration for my ATI Radeon 9200 graphics card.

I have arrived into the solution that I only need to run the installer from here
<url>http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php/topic,1101.0.html</url>,
after booting with extensions off and removing all ATI*.* extensions and I have not installed the update from 2005. I think the ROM on the card is not compatible with the updated 2005 drivers.

Thanks everyone again for the comments and suggestions, it is one hell of a ride. One after effect though, now the resolution is pegged to 1280x720, 1360x768 is not available anymore on the list and the monitor is not identified by the system, it says "VGA Display" now instead of "95QD" which is the model name of the monitor.

But anyhow, I am now a happy camper.

[IIO]

The 1366x768 resolution isn't supported by Mac Os 9. AFAIK.

i think so, too.

in this case the monitor could be the problem and i would recommend to add switchres to the OS9 systemfolder to enable this.

http://www.madrau.com/srx_download/download.html (scroll down)

[Mat]

The 1366x768 resolution isn't supported by Mac Os 9. AFAIK.

i think so, too.

Grrr, ... read the thread, and stop just "scanning the informations"! It is neither Mac OS 9 nor the graphiccard itselve, it is the driver. He had 1366x768 running well with the other driver (but then had no 3d acceleration).

[Nameci]

The 1366x768 resolution isn't supported by Mac Os 9. AFAIK.

i think so, too.

Grrr, ... read the thread, and stop just "scanning the informations"! It is neither Mac OS 9 nor the graphiccard itselve, it is the driver. He had 1366x768 running well with the other driver (but then had no 3d acceleration).

@Mat, that is correct. Just the drivers. I would say that it also needed a clean install of the system.

[IIO]

So did we have a monitor issue, or a driver issue?

it is even more complicated.

beside the actual card driver, the card, its firmware and rom version, the operating system and possible system extensions to it there is another possible player in the game, which is the monitor cables.

if you use a very old VGA cable with a modern monitor oyu might also run into resolution troubles, because the communication with the monitor wont work.

[IIO]

Will somebody explain to me what have just happened?

this can mean anything.

among other things, using another systemfolder also means you got rid of the monitor preferences and eventually even updated info about it in the PRAM.

so it is never 100% sure that some new dirver of that new system folder is what fixed the issue.

[Nameci]

I have played around a little bit. I have booted into OSX again and tinkered with ATI Displays. Now I know, things that you set on the sofware side is being written on the card. I disabled/unchecked a setting which enabled hardware scaler for non-apple monitors (or something to that). After that, I have 1280x768 instead of 1280x720 only. That is on the OSX side.


I rebooted back to OS9, hoping that I get the same selection but failed. Oh well, still I am happy with what I have now.

One more thing, I have updated the ATI extensions to 2005 except ATI Graphic Accelerator, the result I still have graphic acceleration, so it means this extension from 2005 is causing conflict with my the card.

[MacTron]

I have two identical monitors connected to a MDD with a nVidia Ti 4600. As I'm having some issues with the DVI connector, one of the monitors are connected via VGA ( the other remains connected via DVI ) . And Just realised that the DVI accept 1344 x 756 but not the VGA. And both have a really different resolution options.

[MacTron]

  The available resolutions should be determined almost entirely by the card itself in tandem with what it recognizes about the monitor via the sense pins (VGA/ADC-analog), EDID (DVI/ADC-digital/HDMI), or similar methods for TV-out adapters, but it will also only allow resolutions and refresh rates the video card is itself capable of.  As an example, most of my Mac video cards are old enough to not support 16:9 ratios or other odd combinations.  Oddly enough there was one Nubus card ever that was actually supposed to be capable of 1920x1080, but perhaps I'm drifting off topic there.

MacOS Plus is right.