about the Marvel

Trying to install a Matrox Marvel G200, I thought(!) because this guy
(without internet access!) had an install CD for this device lying around by
which I was misled. So I had downloaded a driver from Matrox which I tried
to install.
The driver wouldn't install because it had "not found a compatible device".
But it did do one useful thing for me. Got a message: "devices found: Matrox
Millennium G400".

So at least now I know what card is in his PC.
Now I downloaded the WindowsXP driver for Millennium G400 (xp2k_596_004.exe)
and friday I'll give it another go...




--
regards,

|\ /|
| \/ |@rk
\../
\/os

Linea Recta wrote:
Trying to install a Matrox Marvel G200, I thought(!) because this guy
(without internet access!) had an install CD for this device lying around by
which I was misled. So I had downloaded a driver from Matrox which I tried
to install.
The driver wouldn't install because it had "not found a compatible device".
But it did do one useful thing for me. Got a message: "devices found: Matrox
Millennium G400".

So at least now I know what card is in his PC.
Now I downloaded the WindowsXP driver for Millennium G400 (xp2k_596_004.exe)
and friday I'll give it another go...

That ought to work out a bit better.

Paul

"Paul" schreef in bericht
...
Linea Recta wrote:
Trying to install a Matrox Marvel G200, I thought(!) because this guy
(without internet access!) had an install CD for this device lying around
by which I was misled. So I had downloaded a driver from Matrox which I
tried to install.
The driver wouldn't install because it had "not found a compatible
device". But it did do one useful thing for me. Got a message: "devices
found: Matrox Millennium G400".

So at least now I know what card is in his PC.
Now I downloaded the WindowsXP driver for Millennium G400
(xp2k_596_004.exe) and friday I'll give it another go...

That ought to work out a bit better.



Didn't work. This time I got the message "unsupported device found: Matrox
Millennium G400 Dual Head". What's in a damned name...



--
regards,

|\ /|
| \/ |@rk
\../
\/os

Linea Recta wrote:
"Paul" schreef in bericht
...
Linea Recta wrote:
Trying to install a Matrox Marvel G200, I thought(!) because this guy
(without internet access!) had an install CD for this device lying
around by which I was misled. So I had downloaded a driver from
Matrox which I tried to install.
The driver wouldn't install because it had "not found a compatible
device". But it did do one useful thing for me. Got a message:
"devices found: Matrox Millennium G400".

So at least now I know what card is in his PC.
Now I downloaded the WindowsXP driver for Millennium G400
(xp2k_596_004.exe) and friday I'll give it another go...

That ought to work out a bit better.



Didn't work. This time I got the message "unsupported device found:
Matrox Millennium G400 Dual Head". What's in a damned name...


http://pciids.sourceforge.net/pci.ids

102b Matrox Electronics Systems Ltd.
0525 MGA G400/G450
...
102b 2159 Millennium G400 Dual Head 16Mb

The 102b:0525 would identify a particular chip. The "102b 2159"
would be the SUBSYS or "design instance". Meaning, a custom
board configuration using that chip.

There are a couple features of the card, that could make a
SUBSYS necessary for matching in the INF. Video cards back
then, came in a couple RAM sizes. But the Dual Head also uses
an external converter for the video signal. One output uses
an internal 300MHz DAC, for a 2048 x 1536 signal. The second
output is done with an external converter, limited to 1280 x 1024.
So the second head is not as capable as the first (unlike modern
cards where the heads are symmetric and are no longer referred to
as heads).

http://web.archive.org/web/200306141...0/dualhead.pdf

You'd going to have to download drivers, and keep looking inside INF
files, until you find a match.

You could try using Everest free version, to read out the card
info. I've gotten the 102b:0525 portion (VENEV) using
that tool. The subsys is an eight digit number, where the first
four digits are board maker (still Matrox in this case) and
the other four digits are the instance. So 102b 2159 is the
SUBSYS.

http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/4127/subsys.gif

The Everest program is here.

http://majorgeeks.com/download4181.html

The purpose of verifying the details, is to make sure the
message you got "unsupported device found", is an accurate
determination.

If I look in the file I downloaded before, I can see files inside like

ftp://ftp.matrox.com/pub/mga/archive...2k_596_004.exe

G400.inf

and inside there, a line such as

[Mfg.Matrox]
;---------------
;G400 - English
;---------------

%Str01%%ENG%=IN00.ENG,PCI\VEN_102B&DEV_0525&SUBSYS _2159102B --- line matching 2159

and that's the kind of matching I'm talking about. (Note
that the SUBSYS field can have the fields reversed, and
Everest may present the fields in a different order than
the INF.)

So double check the SUBSYS your card is showing in Everest,
to verify what's going on.

Paul

"Paul" schreef in bericht
...
Linea Recta wrote:
"Paul" schreef in bericht
...
Linea Recta wrote:
Trying to install a Matrox Marvel G200, I thought(!) because this guy
(without internet access!) had an install CD for this device lying
around by which I was misled. So I had downloaded a driver from Matrox
which I tried to install.
The driver wouldn't install because it had "not found a compatible
device". But it did do one useful thing for me. Got a message: "devices
found: Matrox Millennium G400".

So at least now I know what card is in his PC.
Now I downloaded the WindowsXP driver for Millennium G400
(xp2k_596_004.exe) and friday I'll give it another go...

That ought to work out a bit better.



Didn't work. This time I got the message "unsupported device found:
Matrox Millennium G400 Dual Head". What's in a damned name...


http://pciids.sourceforge.net/pci.ids

102b Matrox Electronics Systems Ltd.
0525 MGA G400/G450
...
102b 2159 Millennium G400 Dual Head 16Mb

The 102b:0525 would identify a particular chip. The "102b 2159"
would be the SUBSYS or "design instance". Meaning, a custom
board configuration using that chip.

There are a couple features of the card, that could make a
SUBSYS necessary for matching in the INF. Video cards back
then, came in a couple RAM sizes. But the Dual Head also uses
an external converter for the video signal. One output uses
an internal 300MHz DAC, for a 2048 x 1536 signal. The second
output is done with an external converter, limited to 1280 x 1024.
So the second head is not as capable as the first (unlike modern
cards where the heads are symmetric and are no longer referred to
as heads).

http://web.archive.org/web/200306141...0/dualhead.pdf

You'd going to have to download drivers, and keep looking inside INF
files, until you find a match.

You could try using Everest free version, to read out the card
info. I've gotten the 102b:0525 portion (VENEV) using
that tool. The subsys is an eight digit number, where the first
four digits are board maker (still Matrox in this case) and
the other four digits are the instance. So 102b 2159 is the
SUBSYS.

http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/4127/subsys.gif

The Everest program is here.

http://majorgeeks.com/download4181.html

The purpose of verifying the details, is to make sure the
message you got "unsupported device found", is an accurate
determination.

If I look in the file I downloaded before, I can see files inside like

ftp://ftp.matrox.com/pub/mga/archive...2k_596_004.exe

G400.inf

and inside there, a line such as

[Mfg.Matrox]
;---------------
;G400 - English
;---------------

%Str01%%ENG%=IN00.ENG,PCI\VEN_102B&DEV_0525&SUBSYS _2159102B --- line
matching 2159

and that's the kind of matching I'm talking about. (Note
that the SUBSYS field can have the fields reversed, and
Everest may present the fields in a different order than
the INF.)

So double check the SUBSYS your card is showing in Everest,
to verify what's going on.




Thanks very much for your efforts. I'll have a look at that. The
(additional) problem is that I'm only now and then at my fathers place, and
he doesn't have internet and no documentation. So I'll have to know
everything in advance before I go there, that's what it makes it very
exhausting...



--
regards,

|\ /|
| \/ |@rk
\../
\/os

Linea Recta wrote:
"Paul" schreef in bericht
...
Linea Recta wrote:
"Paul" schreef in bericht
...
Linea Recta wrote:
Trying to install a Matrox Marvel G200, I thought(!) because this
guy (without internet access!) had an install CD for this device
lying around by which I was misled. So I had downloaded a driver
from Matrox which I tried to install.
The driver wouldn't install because it had "not found a compatible
device". But it did do one useful thing for me. Got a message:
"devices found: Matrox Millennium G400".

So at least now I know what card is in his PC.
Now I downloaded the WindowsXP driver for Millennium G400
(xp2k_596_004.exe) and friday I'll give it another go...

That ought to work out a bit better.



Didn't work. This time I got the message "unsupported device found:
Matrox Millennium G400 Dual Head". What's in a damned name...


http://pciids.sourceforge.net/pci.ids

102b Matrox Electronics Systems Ltd.
0525 MGA G400/G450
...
102b 2159 Millennium G400 Dual Head 16Mb

The 102b:0525 would identify a particular chip. The "102b 2159"
would be the SUBSYS or "design instance". Meaning, a custom
board configuration using that chip.

There are a couple features of the card, that could make a
SUBSYS necessary for matching in the INF. Video cards back
then, came in a couple RAM sizes. But the Dual Head also uses
an external converter for the video signal. One output uses
an internal 300MHz DAC, for a 2048 x 1536 signal. The second
output is done with an external converter, limited to 1280 x 1024.
So the second head is not as capable as the first (unlike modern
cards where the heads are symmetric and are no longer referred to
as heads).

http://web.archive.org/web/200306141...0/dualhead.pdf


You'd going to have to download drivers, and keep looking inside INF
files, until you find a match.

You could try using Everest free version, to read out the card
info. I've gotten the 102b:0525 portion (VENEV) using
that tool. The subsys is an eight digit number, where the first
four digits are board maker (still Matrox in this case) and
the other four digits are the instance. So 102b 2159 is the
SUBSYS.

http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/4127/subsys.gif

The Everest program is here.

http://majorgeeks.com/download4181.html

The purpose of verifying the details, is to make sure the
message you got "unsupported device found", is an accurate
determination.

If I look in the file I downloaded before, I can see files inside like

ftp://ftp.matrox.com/pub/mga/archive...2k_596_004.exe

G400.inf

and inside there, a line such as

[Mfg.Matrox]
;---------------
;G400 - English
;---------------

%Str01%%ENG%=IN00.ENG,PCI\VEN_102B&DEV_0525&SUBSYS _2159102B ---
line matching 2159

and that's the kind of matching I'm talking about. (Note
that the SUBSYS field can have the fields reversed, and
Everest may present the fields in a different order than
the INF.)

So double check the SUBSYS your card is showing in Everest,
to verify what's going on.




Thanks very much for your efforts. I'll have a look at that. The
(additional) problem is that I'm only now and then at my fathers place,
and he doesn't have internet and no documentation. So I'll have to know
everything in advance before I go there, that's what it makes it very
exhausting...

I was going to suggest taking another video card with you,
but looking at the stock on Newegg, it's looking like the
end of the AGP era. There's a 6200 for $42, but that was
the cheapest one I could see. Looking at the picture, it's
keyed for both 1.5V and 3.3V.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814134076

This site

http://www.playtool.com/pages/agpcompat/agp.html

lists the 6200 as available in two formats.

NVIDIA GeForce 6200 Universal 1.5V AGP 3.0 Card or
Universal AGP 3.0 Card

The "Universal AGP 3.0 Card" would have slots cut for both 1.5V and 3.3V.
It would be similar to all the AGP FX5200 cards, which are all Universal AGP 3.0.
A "universal" card is a good one to take with you on repair trips.

I believe I've tested my FX5200 AGP card in my 440BX (~11 year old) system,
which is a 1X slot running at 3.3V. And it worked. I think my ATI 9800Pro
wouldn't work in that slot (but was supposed to). So if I was driving
to a relatives place, and faced with your situation, I'd take a 5200 or a
6200 with me. If you have enough old computers around, you could
test it works with older slot configurations or whatever. (Like, I could
take my WinXP OEM disc, install without activating, and check that
a driver install works with a given set of hardware.)

Either that, or download all the drivers you can find on the Matrox
page that are remotely relevant, and take them with you. Having had
a look at the INF files in advance, for what the drivers might support.
(I use 7ZIP for that, as an easy way to get at the INF inside the .exe)

Paul

"Paul" schreef in bericht
...
Linea Recta wrote:
"Paul" schreef in bericht
...
Linea Recta wrote:
"Paul" schreef in bericht
...
Linea Recta wrote:
Trying to install a Matrox Marvel G200, I thought(!) because this guy
(without internet access!) had an install CD for this device lying
around by which I was misled. So I had downloaded a driver from
Matrox which I tried to install.
The driver wouldn't install because it had "not found a compatible
device". But it did do one useful thing for me. Got a message:
"devices found: Matrox Millennium G400".

So at least now I know what card is in his PC.
Now I downloaded the WindowsXP driver for Millennium G400
(xp2k_596_004.exe) and friday I'll give it another go...

That ought to work out a bit better.



Didn't work. This time I got the message "unsupported device found:
Matrox Millennium G400 Dual Head". What's in a damned name...


http://pciids.sourceforge.net/pci.ids

102b Matrox Electronics Systems Ltd.
0525 MGA G400/G450
...
102b 2159 Millennium G400 Dual Head 16Mb

The 102b:0525 would identify a particular chip. The "102b 2159"
would be the SUBSYS or "design instance". Meaning, a custom
board configuration using that chip.

There are a couple features of the card, that could make a
SUBSYS necessary for matching in the INF. Video cards back
then, came in a couple RAM sizes. But the Dual Head also uses
an external converter for the video signal. One output uses
an internal 300MHz DAC, for a 2048 x 1536 signal. The second
output is done with an external converter, limited to 1280 x 1024.
So the second head is not as capable as the first (unlike modern
cards where the heads are symmetric and are no longer referred to
as heads).

http://web.archive.org/web/200306141...0/dualhead.pdf

You'd going to have to download drivers, and keep looking inside INF
files, until you find a match.

You could try using Everest free version, to read out the card
info. I've gotten the 102b:0525 portion (VENEV) using
that tool. The subsys is an eight digit number, where the first
four digits are board maker (still Matrox in this case) and
the other four digits are the instance. So 102b 2159 is the
SUBSYS.

http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/4127/subsys.gif

The Everest program is here.

http://majorgeeks.com/download4181.html

The purpose of verifying the details, is to make sure the
message you got "unsupported device found", is an accurate
determination.

If I look in the file I downloaded before, I can see files inside like

ftp://ftp.matrox.com/pub/mga/archive...2k_596_004.exe

G400.inf

and inside there, a line such as

[Mfg.Matrox]
;---------------
;G400 - English
;---------------

%Str01%%ENG%=IN00.ENG,PCI\VEN_102B&DEV_0525&SUBSYS _2159102B ---
line matching 2159

and that's the kind of matching I'm talking about. (Note
that the SUBSYS field can have the fields reversed, and
Everest may present the fields in a different order than
the INF.)

So double check the SUBSYS your card is showing in Everest,
to verify what's going on.




Thanks very much for your efforts. I'll have a look at that. The
(additional) problem is that I'm only now and then at my fathers place,
and he doesn't have internet and no documentation. So I'll have to know
everything in advance before I go there, that's what it makes it very
exhausting...

I was going to suggest taking another video card with you,
but looking at the stock on Newegg, it's looking like the
end of the AGP era. There's a 6200 for $42, but that was
the cheapest one I could see. Looking at the picture, it's
keyed for both 1.5V and 3.3V.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814134076

This site

http://www.playtool.com/pages/agpcompat/agp.html

lists the 6200 as available in two formats.

NVIDIA GeForce 6200 Universal 1.5V AGP 3.0 Card or
Universal AGP 3.0 Card

The "Universal AGP 3.0 Card" would have slots cut for both 1.5V and 3.3V.
It would be similar to all the AGP FX5200 cards, which are all Universal
AGP 3.0.
A "universal" card is a good one to take with you on repair trips.

I believe I've tested my FX5200 AGP card in my 440BX (~11 year old)
system,
which is a 1X slot running at 3.3V. And it worked. I think my ATI 9800Pro
wouldn't work in that slot (but was supposed to). So if I was driving
to a relatives place, and faced with your situation, I'd take a 5200 or a
6200 with me. If you have enough old computers around, you could
test it works with older slot configurations or whatever. (Like, I could
take my WinXP OEM disc, install without activating, and check that
a driver install works with a given set of hardware.)

Either that, or download all the drivers you can find on the Matrox
page that are remotely relevant, and take them with you. Having had
a look at the INF files in advance, for what the drivers might support.
(I use 7ZIP for that, as an easy way to get at the INF inside the .exe)



That's a very good idea, wonder why I didn't think of this myself...
Assuming that all drivers display error messages before installing on wrong
hardware. If not, I risk causing a shambles...



--
regards,

|\ /|
| \/ |@rk
\../
\/os