Why does everyone diss the Kyro2?

[SYST3M]

no t&l = sucks arse. that's why. to get decent framerates or even cool looks you need hardware t&l. I've been reading up on the StarWars Galaxies dev boards about how people are pissed off that they have to upgrade their 3 year old tnt2 or 1.5 year old kryo card cuz it doesn't have t&l and SWG requires it. Well dammit, for any game to look good it has to run on the newer hardware, so pony up and quit bitching or go play somewhere else. you get what you pay for and a $50 is a piece of junk. i'd never reccomend a kryo to anyone, NOT ONE SINGLE PERSON. that's how bad it sucks. better to use the gf2 mx thats build on to an nForce mobo than a kryo 2.

 

[sash1]

Originally posted by: SYST3M
no t&l = sucks arse. that's why. to get decent framerates or even cool looks you need hardware t&l. I've been reading up on the StarWars Galaxies dev boards about how people are pissed off that they have to upgrade their 3 year old tnt2 or 1.5 year old kryo card cuz it doesn't have t&l and SWG requires it. Well dammit, for any game to look good it has to run on the newer hardware, so pony up and quit bitching or go play somewhere else. you get what you pay for and a $50 is a piece of junk. i'd never reccomend a kryo to anyone, NOT ONE SINGLE PERSON. that's how bad it sucks. better to use the gf2 mx thats build on to an nForce mobo than a kryo 2.

subtitle: "blah blah blah blah blah!"

-Star Wars sux.
-I wouldn't recommend it either, it isn't worth it anymore.
-MX sucks compared to the Kyro II.
-"Well dammit, for any game to look good it has to run on the newer hardware" Okay, lets both take screen shots from a video game (you with your GF4, me with my Kyro II) and people can compare...

~Aunix

 

[rApiDShoT]

Are you talking about the Star Wars games sucks or what?

Cause Star Wars rocks!

 

[holdencommodore]

In the same price category, the Kyro II is still quite good. What else is in the price category... MX200, MX400, Radeon 7000 and that's about it. If I could get a Radeon 8500 for US$99 like some of you guys, then I would get one instantly! But since Radeon 8500's are about $400AU (about $218US) in Australia, I just can't afford one.

Cheers

 

[SYST3M]

Aunix try running Tribes 2 on your Kryo 2 at 1280x1024 @ 60 fps and we'll see who has the better visual quality. You'd have to turn every setting down to get that high of a resolution and framerate. Try 1280x1024 in RtCW and you'll have to do the same things to get the framerates i do, so that's what i call "Visual Quality." Not to mention you'll never be able to play SWG on that card. Take a look at the screenshots, it's very impressive. This isn't even going into Doom 3. You won't even be able to touch that game with your card. HA HA HA HA, i'd like to see you try.

 

[nemesismk2]

Originally posted by: SYST3M
Aunix try running Tribes 2 on your Kryo 2 at 1280x1024 @ 60 fps and we'll see who has the better visual quality. You'd have to turn every setting down to get that high of a resolution and framerate. Try 1280x1024 in RtCW and you'll have to do the same things to get the framerates i do, so that's what i call "Visual Quality." Not to mention you'll never be able to play SWG on that card. Take a look at the screenshots, it's very impressive. This isn't even going into Doom 3. You won't even be able to touch that game with your card. HA HA HA HA, i'd like to see you try.

Nice one mention a game which hasn't even been released yet, that's funny because people also said that the Kyro2 wouldn't be able to run Unreal 2003, Serious Sam and Max Payne etc etc. Well it runs them very well especially when you consider the Kyro2 only costs $50. Until games are released it's impossible to tell what will or willn't run them at an acceptable frame rate. I've heard comments that Doom3 even when used with a GF4 Ti4600 (which USED to be the fastest video card available but now behind the much superior ATI 9700) will really struggle with max detail and high resolutions.

 

[rogue1979]

I'm gonna diss the Kyro II! I was always intrigued by the tile-based rendering. I found an Apollo 64MB version for $39 locally, so what the heck. I expected more from it because all the Kyro zealots said it was as fast as a GTS or Ultra. Bullcrap. I used it for a couple of days, and it struggled to run my games at 1024 x 768 x 32 at 2x FSAA. Not bad for a $39 card, but for the same $39 I have two original Radeon 32MB DDR cards that spank it badly. I don't care what the reviews claim, it is not as fast as the original Radeons and no way in hell can it touch a Geforce2 Ti or Ultra. I know, I have all of these cards running here at the house right now.

To put it in perspective, for $39 it does an OK job. But there are simply other options for the same price or slightly more that are clearly superior choices. I have nothing against the Kyro II, but I am tired of people claiming it is faster than it really is.

 

[Sunner]

I don't think people are dissing the Kyro II so much as simply saying it's an old and mostly obsolete card.

For playing some reasonably new games at reasonable resolutions, it's an ok card, but if you're into newer games, high resolutions, or play games that use newer features, it just doesn't cut it anymore, not cause it sucks, but cause it's an old card, much the same way a GF DDR doesn't cut it either.

As for price, where I live, a Kyro is about the same price as a GF2 Ti, and frankly, between those two there's no contest IMO.
Similar speed in older games, the GF will win in games that use T&L, and most importantly, the GF will work with just about anything for two resons.
There are tons and tons of GF2's out there, so game developers can't even think about ignoring them, and secondly, nVidia keeps updating their drivers all the time.

Or in short, as I said, it's not a bad card, it's just old, even Einstein would probabaly get a tad senile once he became old enough

Oh and about that article, I found it a little suspect, considdering they somehow managed to get the Ti200 to score higher than the Ti500.

 

[sash1]

Originally posted by: SYST3M
Aunix try running Tribes 2 on your Kryo 2 at 1280x1024 @ 60 fps and we'll see who has the better visual quality. You'd have to turn every setting down to get that high of a resolution and framerate. Try 1280x1024 in RtCW and you'll have to do the same things to get the framerates i do, so that's what i call "Visual Quality." Not to mention you'll never be able to play SWG on that card. Take a look at the screenshots, it's very impressive. This isn't even going into Doom 3. You won't even be able to touch that game with your card. HA HA HA HA, i'd like to see you try.

Well, I don't prefer to run my games at that resolution (mostly because my monitor looks crappy at it), but what the heck. I run ALL MY games (yes, even Max Payne, RTCW, and the like) at 1024x768 with 4xFSAA and trilinear, it looks very nice.

"Not to mention you'll never be able to play SWG on that card" I think I already went over this, I HATE STAR WARS!
"You won't even be able to touch that game with your card. HA HA HA HA, i'd like to see you try." Okay, I'll keep my Kyro II even after I upgrade just to prove you wrong.

~Aunix

 

[Crapgame]

I just visited my old KyroII yesterday, it plays no games anymore except the Wolfinstien demo on occation and what it has turned into is a good photoshop card. Fair to good 2-D and fairly accurate color, does the job well in fact.

 

[nemesismk2]

Originally posted by: rogue1979
I'm gonna diss the Kyro II! I was always intrigued by the tile-based rendering. I found an Apollo 64MB version for $39 locally, so what the heck. I expected more from it because all the Kyro zealots said it was as fast as a GTS or Ultra. Bullcrap. I used it for a couple of days, and it struggled to run my games at 1024 x 768 x 32 at 2x FSAA. Not bad for a $39 card, but for the same $39 I have two original Radeon 32MB DDR cards that spank it badly. I don't care what the reviews claim, it is not as fast as the original Radeons and no way in hell can it touch a Geforce2 Ti or Ultra. I know, I have all of these cards running here at the house right now.

To put it in perspective, for $39 it does an OK job. But there are simply other options for the same price or slightly more that are clearly superior choices. I have nothing against the Kyro II, but I am tired of people claiming it is faster than it really is.

You purchased the most rubbish Kyro2 available, Apollo are your typical bulk supplier who doesn't care about memory speed, reliability or anything like that. The Apollo Kyro2 even has problems running at the standard speed of 175mhz because it's so poorly made. If you had purchased a Kyro2 from Hercules or Videologic your experiences with it would of been much more positive.

 

[nemesismk2]

Originally posted by: Crapgame
I just visited my old KyroII yesterday, it plays no games anymore except the Wolfinstien demo on occation and what it has turned into is a good photoshop card. Fair to good 2-D and fairly accurate color, does the job well in fact.

What do you mean it plays no games anymore?
Do your games run slow and at what resolutions?
What type of Kyro2 do you own?
Are you using the latest drivers? (currently v1.05.15.0084)

 

[SYST3M]

i mentioned two games that are currently out and curiously you failed to even talk about tribes 2, because it actually needs the hardware T&L engine to run any where near what you might call "good" As for RtCW i run it max everything with 4xFSAA and i still get 125 fps. My point about Doom 3 is that at least i'll be able to run it, whereas you won't without upgrading. And about not being able to run it in max detail, that's fine with me, the E3 demo was run in medium detail even on the RV300, so i wouldn't expect it to run max detail. I doubt even the NV30 will be able to do max detail at what i call acceptable framerates. Get your head out of your arse and stop being a mindless fanboy. Kryo 2s are worthless for gaming. [btw I am purchasing an RV300 this august if they are out at that point, just to give it a try. cuz i like to buy the latest and greatest]

 

[SYST3M]

nemesismk2: I happen to be following the SWG development closely, and at this point you have to have a GF3 to even be considered for the Beta, and i know for a fact that the Devs said that you will need a card with HW T&L. so that discounts the Kryo 2 right there, if you want proof, here's a link. look for Holocron He's a developer, and it even says he is under his avatar.
Proof

 

[nemesismk2]

Originally posted by: SYST3M
nemesismk2: I happen to be following the SWG development closely, and at this point you have to have a GF3 to even be considered for the Beta, and i know for a fact that the Devs said that you will need a card with HW T&L. so that discounts the Kryo 2 right there, if you want proof, here's a link. look for Holocron He's a developer, and it even says he is under his avatar.
Proof

huh? I've never said anything about SWG! :disgust:

Actually NO that doesn't discount the Kyro 2, some of the Kyro2 fans I know are very talented and they WILL make the game work with the Kyro2. Anyway by the time SWG is released they would of cracked enhanced t&l and enabled it for all Kyro video cards anyway so it will be a none issue. Yeah you might have to reduce some of the settings but I'm sure it will be playable atleast.

 

[nemesismk2]

Originally posted by: SYST3M
i mentioned two games that are currently out and curiously you failed to even talk about tribes 2, because it actually needs the hardware T&L engine to run any where near what you might call "good" As for RtCW i run it max everything with 4xFSAA and i still get 125 fps. My point about Doom 3 is that at least i'll be able to run it, whereas you won't without upgrading. And about not being able to run it in max detail, that's fine with me, the E3 demo was run in medium detail even on the RV300, so i wouldn't expect it to run max detail. I doubt even the NV30 will be able to do max detail at what i call acceptable framerates. Get your head out of your arse and stop being a mindless fanboy. Kryo 2s are worthless for gaming. [btw I am purchasing an RV300 this august if they are out at that point, just to give it a try. cuz i like to buy the latest and greatest]

Are you talking to me? I own a GF4 Ti4600 and a GF4 MX440 and your calling ME a Kyro2 fanboy? If you are talking to me next time get your facts straight so you don't make an even bigger tw*t of yourself than you already have!

 

[Crapgame]

Oh theres nothing wrong with it beyond itself, I've just put it into a retirement home. It's now in my bosses machine at the studio and generaly only sees Photoshop and SHQ pics from an Olympus E-10 (Tiff gets silly above 4megapixels). Upgrade is on the way to the E-10, well see how it handles even more photo-info ........................... time is limited though as an ATI7500 is waiting to bump the KyroII out.

 

[SYST3M]

hey if the shoe fits, wear it

 

[nemesismk2]

Originally posted by: SYST3M
hey if the shoe fits, wear it

who are you talking to?

 

[tenoc]

Hey, I don't diss it. Heck, I don't diss the S3 Virge 4meg either.

The one I just put in a friend's PC to upgrade from a Tridident 9440 1meg.

Every card has its place and time.

 

[vedin]

My Kyro is still chugging along quite nicely. Never really had any glitches with it, other than if you enable FSAA with it, you see lens flares through walls. Big deal, I'd rather play at 1024x768 and get 50-80fps than play at 800x600 with 4XAA and get 40 anyway. (Just a rough estimate folks, on occassion the FPS dip into the lower 30s...which is still playable, especially when it only stays that way for a nano-second. ) Not a bad card when I bought it, and it's still getting totally playable frame-rates in everything I through at it. Okay, not Morrowind, but let's face it, no one pulls much over 60fps in that game regaurdless of their system.

 

[BFG10K]

Yeah, but what about when the 8500 wasn't around? It was the Kyro II, the Radeon LE (and that GTS-V).

During those days I always recommended the vanilla GTS over the Kyro2 because I felt that it was the better card overall.

 

[nemesismk2]

Originally posted by: BFG10K

Yeah, but what about when the 8500 wasn't around? It was the Kyro II, the Radeon LE (and that GTS-V).

During those days I always recommended the vanilla GTS over the Kyro2 because I felt that it was the better card overall.

It would be interesting if someone did a K2 v GTS revisited type of review to see if things have changed with new drivers and a faster processor. IMO the result would be pretty close between them with the K2 just edging out the GTS with it's good performance with Unreal 2003 and great 2D quality!

 

[BFG10K]

Tom's VGA Charts.

 

[Kingofcomputer]

For the US market, Kyro and Kyro2 is a total failure.
Their performance/price value is not better than ATI or Nvidia based cards at release time and even this moment. We have so many cheap imported ATI and Nvidia based cards available to buy, like the Radeon LE, GTS-V from Visiontek, Power Color made cards, and more.

For the other countries, ATI and Nvidia based cards could be highly over-priced, that makes Kyro and kyro2 a better buy.