ATI FireGL/FireProSoftmod - Discussion Thread for new members

[schoko]

have updated the script.
hope it works now. since i don´t have the possibility to test xp 32 myself, please report back if it works this time.

btw- please delete the already patched ati2mtag.sys and rename the ati2mtag.old to ati2mtag.sys. after that you can patch it again.

[PC620]

Originally Posted by schoko

have updated the script.
hope it works now. since i don´t have the possibility to test xp 32 myself, please report back if it works this time.

btw- please delete the already patched ati2mtag.sys and rename the ati2mtag.old to ati2mtag.sys. after that you can patch it again.

Thanks much schoko. I'll report how it goes.

Are you saying to delete the ati2mtag.sys under the Windows Drivers folder? I found it in there but there is no ati2mtag.old file to rename per your instruction.

Do I still need to delete this ati2mtag.sys ?

[kingkaran]

Originally Posted by schoko

have updated the script.
hope it works now. since i don´t have the possibility to test xp 32 myself, please report back if it works this time.

btw- please delete the already patched ati2mtag.sys and rename the ati2mtag.old to ati2mtag.sys. after that you can patch it again.

i tired this script but same result ..btw wen i uninstalled drivers before going for new patch xp gives me notification that found new hardware ati firepro v8750 n i m installing v8700 bt before installing ur patchscript i was running my gpu as v8750 on gellmar patchscript (but had uninstalled it from device manager) is this becoz of that i m having this problem in 3dsmax 2008 ??

[schoko]

well, if you had done it right, you shouldn´t get such a notification.

the patching with rivatuner gave no errors ? is the performance in opengl as it should be ? have you tested with specviewperf 10 if the mod has worked out ?

if you can answer those question with yes, it is still possible that ati´s driver has some issues with max. it´s at least a possibility. or maybe a setting for the graphics card that is not working well with 3dmax?

please use the specviewperf so we can check if the mod is working.

[kingkaran]

i don,t hav specviewperf 10 (my download speed is 25 - 30kbps) i ll download it till tommorow n will run a benchmark to sort this confusion btw rivatuner had given me error...n i noticed that their is no difference in rendering bt viewport is running better then first it was ....

[PC620]

Hello,
what caused this error? I tried deleting the ati2mtag.sys and also renaming it to ati2mtag.old as well but still getting this error in RT.

what am I doing wrong? Thanks.

 Browsing for file ati2mtag.sys... compressed file selected
Depacking ati2mtag.sy_... succeeded
Browsing for file ati2mtag.sys... selected 6.14.10.6973, 4125184 bytes
Using native patch installation mode 0
WARNING: Certified patch script not found, using common patch script...
0015174a> matched sequence has been replaced
ff 75 08 e8 31 5d 00 00 85 c0 74 2e 33 c0 eb 3b 
ff 75 08 e8 31 5d 00 00 85 c0 74 2e 33 c0 eb 38 
0039635d> matched sequence has been replaced
66 3b 46 04 74 51 66 89 46 04 
66 3b 46 04 eb 51 66 89 46 04 
00396397> matched sequence has been replaced
66 3b 46 04 74 17 66 89 46 04 
66 3b 46 04 eb 51 66 89 46 04 
00396cef> matched sequence has been replaced
83 f8 40 75 0b 66 81 bd fc fe ff ff 02 10 74 0c 
83 f8 40 75 0b 66 c7 85 fe fe ff ff 56 94 74 0c 
ERROR: Target sequence must be replaced 1 time(s)!
66 3b 46 04 74 51 66 89 46 04

[schoko]

Originally Posted by PC620

Hello,
what caused this error? I tried deleting the ati2mtag.sys and also renaming it to ati2mtag.old as well but still getting this error in RT.

what am I doing wrong? Thanks.

 Browsing for file ati2mtag.sys... compressed file selected
Depacking ati2mtag.sy_... succeeded
Browsing for file ati2mtag.sys... selected 6.14.10.6973, 4125184 bytes
Using native patch installation mode 0
WARNING: Certified patch script not found, using common patch script...
0015174a> matched sequence has been replaced
ff 75 08 e8 31 5d 00 00 85 c0 74 2e 33 c0 eb 3b 
ff 75 08 e8 31 5d 00 00 85 c0 74 2e 33 c0 eb 38 
0039635d> matched sequence has been replaced
66 3b 46 04 74 51 66 89 46 04 
66 3b 46 04 eb 51 66 89 46 04 
00396397> matched sequence has been replaced
66 3b 46 04 74 17 66 89 46 04 
66 3b 46 04 eb 51 66 89 46 04 
00396cef> matched sequence has been replaced
83 f8 40 75 0b 66 81 bd fc fe ff ff 02 10 74 0c 
83 f8 40 75 0b 66 c7 85 fe fe ff ff 56 94 74 0c 
ERROR: Target sequence must be replaced 1 time(s)!
66 3b 46 04 74 51 66 89 46 04

ahem well, that was my bad...

edited the script again... please try that one... the last one had a bug... i bug in my logic.

[PC620]

Originally Posted by schoko

ahem well, that was my bad...

edited the script again... please try that one... the last one had a bug... i bug in my logic.

Good you found a bug. I kept tryiing different things but couldn't get pass that.

With the new script, I was able to patch it now so will let you know how it goes soon. Thanks again. Good job.

Quick Update:

XP32, HD4890 to V8700 on 8.634 version. Also including previous tests with 8.603 from gellmar and wesley8.

Specviewperf10:
Maya = 138.33 & 138.18 (schoko's 8.634)
Maya = 149.72 & 145.88 (gellmar & wesley8 both with 8.603)

3dsmax = 21.72 (schoko's 8.634)
3dsmax = 22.34 & 22.21 (gellmar & wesley8 both with 8.603)

ProE = 25.85 (schoko's 8.634)
ProE = 24.9 (gellmar's 8.603)

Based on these scores, looks like 8.603 has a bit more improvement than 8.634 (except for ProE), I am not sure why. I have removed and re-patch 8.634 three times - got same scores. I am expecting 8.634 to the match the 8.603's performance (if not better). Anything else I can try?

Thanks.

[lusefar]

Originally Posted by schoko

well, if you had done it right, you shouldn´t get such a notification.

the patching with rivatuner gave no errors ? is the performance in opengl as it should be ? have you tested with specviewperf 10 if the mod has worked out ?

if you can answer those question with yes, it is still possible that ati´s driver has some issues with max. it´s at least a possibility. or maybe a setting for the graphics card that is not working well with 3dmax?

please use the specviewperf so we can check if the mod is working.

first Thing , the Script works.
but i found a Bug. i opened a Bench_scene (for example Bike.ma) it goes 110 fps, and i opened other scene and then reopened Bike.ma , the fps dropped to 20. (genausoviel wie das mit alten atiogl.xml) i tested it in win7_32 xp_32 with maya 2008 ,2009sp1 and 2010.

hast du auch solche Problem?

[schoko]

Originally Posted by PC620

Good you found a bug. I kept tryiing different things but couldn't get pass that.

With the new script, I was able to patch it now so will let you know how it goes soon. Thanks again. Good job.

Quick Update:

XP32, HD4890 to V8700 on 8.634 version. Also including previous tests with 8.603 from gellmar and wesley8.

Specviewperf10:
Maya = 138.33 & 138.18 (schoko's 8.634)
Maya = 149.72 & 145.88 (gellmar & wesley8 both with 8.603)

3dsmax = 21.72 (schoko's 8.634)
3dsmax = 22.34 & 22.21 (gellmar & wesley8 both with 8.603)

ProE = 25.85 (schoko's 8.634)
ProE = 24.9 (gellmar's 8.603)

Based on these scores, looks like 8.603 has a bit more improvement than 8.634 (except for ProE), I am not sure why. I have removed and re-patch 8.634 three times - got same scores. I am expecting 8.634 to the match the 8.603's performance (if not better). Anything else I can try?

Thanks.

the specviewperf actually just tells you if the mod has worked out or not.
it is more a synthetic benchmark than real world application, at least for maya this is the case. so i wouldn´t take it too serious when your results are down 1 or 2 frames/sec.

you should be testing some of the real world applications now.

Originally Posted by lusefar

first Thing , the Script works.
but i found a Bug. i opened a Bench_scene (for example Bike.ma) it goes 110 fps, and i opened other scene and then reopened Bike.ma , the fps dropped to 20. (genausoviel wie das mit alten atiogl.xml) i tested it in win7_32 xp_32 with maya 2008 ,2009sp1 and 2010.

hast du auch solche Problem?

Nein, hab ich nicht

so, basicly i have had only 64 bit windows xp and 64 bit windows 7 installed, and my guess is since the performance with the modified atiogl.xml is not steady, the settings for win 32 bit systems must be slightly different.

basicly there are even two opengldrivers for 32bit and for 64 bit applications
,the atio6axx.dll and the atioglxx.dll. i have only been able to test this in 64 bit OS ,but not in 32bit. and from what other with 64 bit systems report the performance is steady and as good as it is supposed to be.

so, probably the setting for the drivers for 32 bit xp and win7 must be slightly changed to have the acceleration working in maya all the time.

[schoko]

well, i guess i´ll have to rethink my statement about the better multicore support in win7 x64 and the effect on maya´s viewport performance.

when i made the tests in win 7 i totally forgot that i have used a newer modification of atiogl.xml...

will have to look a little bit closer into that in the next days, but here´s what i have found:

maya2010 has a better viewport performance than 2009sp1. in the bikescene it was around 8-10fps.

1. so my latest tests in win7 x64 (maya2009 sp1) showed a serious improvement in almost all scenes. in the bikescene i had around 80 fps.

maya 2010 would even be a tad faster than those 80 fps.


2. i have just used the modified atiogl.xml i used under win7 x64 for my tests in xp64 :
- the results in maya2009sp1 (x64) and 2010(x64) stayed about the same.
- out of interest i installed a 32 bit version of maya 2010 in xp64, and it shows the same high numbers as the results i achieved in win 7 x64. even the bikescene was over 80 fps in xp 64 (maya2010 x32).

my findings about this different behaviour of the various packages:

-probably there is still some space left for improvements... might not be very much though

- the viewport model of maya and the opengl-drivers atio6xx.dll and atioglxx.dll are reacting quite a bit different to the used settings, and thus there are some differences in the results.

- when comparing the latest tests in win xp64 (maya 2010 x32) with the latest tests in win7 x64 (maya2009sp1 x64) the only tests that showed constantly the highest framerates in win 7 no matter what atiogl.xml was used were the high quality rendering tests in spec cap.
those are definitely 40-80% better than in xp, no matter what package of maya is used to test.

[PC620]

Originally Posted by schoko

the specviewperf actually just tells you if the mod has worked out or not.
it is more a synthetic benchmark than real world application, at least for maya this is the case. so i wouldn´t take it too serious when your results are down 1 or 2 frames/sec.

you should be testing some of the real world applications now.

With gellmar's ver. 8.603, the SpecviewPerf10 gave 149.48 for Maya last night. This morning I tested it again and this time I got 137.48 so too reliable for this test comparison purpose.

Using Real Maya2010 App (30-day trial version):
Bike.ma = ~51 fps (schoko's ver 8.634 with latest atiogl.xml)
Bike.ma = ~51 fps (gellmar's ver 8.603)

Mayascene2.ma = ~4 - 9 fps (schoko's ver 8.634 with latest atiogl.xml)
Mayascene2.ma = ~4 - 9 fps (gellmar's ver 8.603)

So the two versions (8.634 and 8.603) have the same performance in Maya2010 on my XP32 rig. I will further continue testing...

Thanks to schoko, gellmar, wesley8 and all others who help made this softmod possible.

[ehsan7715]

hi
i have an amature question sorry!
i have a modded card
4850 To V8700 @ WIN7 x64 and V7770 @ XPx64 (Driver 8.633)
i see FPS changes in viewspecs 10 in windows XP (and test dont work in win7)
but there is no change in 3d max rendering time or viewport
how can i use my new V8700 Firepro Card in 3D studio MAX 2010

i have same problem with my 8800GTS @ 4700 QUADRO
TNX

[schoko]

Originally Posted by PC620

With gellmar's ver. 8.603, the SpecviewPerf10 gave 149.48 for Maya last night. This morning I tested it again and this time I got 137.48 so too reliable for this test comparison purpose.

Using Real Maya2010 App (30-day trial version):
Bike.ma = ~51 fps (schoko's ver 8.634 with latest atiogl.xml)
Bike.ma = ~51 fps (gellmar's ver 8.603)

Mayascene2.ma = ~4 - 9 fps (schoko's ver 8.634 with latest atiogl.xml)
Mayascene2.ma = ~4 - 9 fps (gellmar's ver 8.603)

So the two versions (8.634 and 8.603) have the same performance in Maya2010 on my XP32 rig. I will further continue testing...

Thanks to schoko, gellmar, wesley8 and all others who help made this softmod possible.

well, it seems you have a problem mate..., your results are way beyond what the card actually can deliver in terms of performance. you should check if you don´t have a wrong setting in your CCC. check for the 3d settings, maybe something is wrong there. try the "let application decide" settings, maybe it helps. you should examine whats the probloem there. and for references check veselinbg´s results... he only has a 4850, and it totally rocks.


and btw. i am pretty sure that the 50+ in the bikescene from the wesley8 / gellmar driver have to do with the modified atiogl.xml. that patch never had such high framerates in a real mayascenario.

if you want to compare both mods, copy the atiogl.xml, that comes with the 8.603 driver to c:\windows, and you´ll see whats the difference.

butanyway, your framerates should be way higher... bikescene should be around 100 fps... you better check whats the problem there.

Originally Posted by ehsan7715

hi
i have an amature question sorry!
i have a modded card
4850 To V8700 @ WIN7 x64 and XPx64 Driver 8.633
i see FPS changes in viewspecs 10 in windows XP (and test dont work in win7)
but there is no change in 3d max rendering time or viewport
how can i use my new V8700 Firepro Card in 3D studio MAX 2010

i have same problem with my 8800GTS @ 4700QUAD
TNX

for 3dmax the firegl comes with a special driver, that is meant to be installed, and used in max only. that driver came with the 8.634 driver, and it is called fireglmax, or fglmax.

and btw. rendering speed will definitly not be affected by the graphics card, at least not in opengl, renderings are processed by the gpu... at least for now... the near future will bring us a performance boost with renderings done by the graphicscards. but for now you will have use your CPU for that.

[xKrNMBoYx]

Originally Posted by schoko

well, i guess i´ll have to rethink my statement about the better multicore support in win7 x64 and the effect on maya´s viewport performance.

when i made the tests in win 7 i totally forgot that i have used a newer modification of atiogl.xml...

will have to look a little bit closer into that in the next days, but here´s what i have found:

maya2010 has a better viewport performance than 2009sp1. in the bikescene it was around 8-10fps.

1. so my latest tests in win7 x64 (maya2009 sp1) showed a serious improvement in almost all scenes. in the bikescene i had around 80 fps.

maya 2010 would even be a tad faster than those 80 fps.


2. i have just used the modified atiogl.xml i used under win7 x64 for my tests in xp64 :
- the results in maya2009sp1 (x64) and 2010(x64) stayed about the same.
- out of interest i installed a 32 bit version of maya 2010 in xp64, and it shows the same high numbers as the results i achieved in win 7 x64. even the bikescene was over 80 fps in xp 64 (maya2010 x32).

my findings about this different behaviour of the various packages:

-probably there is still some space left for improvements... might not be very much though

- the viewport model of maya and the opengl-drivers atio6xx.dll and atioglxx.dll are reacting quite a bit different to the used settings, and thus there are some differences in the results.

- when comparing the latest tests in win xp64 (maya 2010 x32) with the latest tests in win7 x64 (maya2009sp1 x64) the only tests that showed constantly the highest framerates in win 7 no matter what atiogl.xml was used were the high quality rendering tests in spec cap.
those are definitely 40-80% better than in xp, no matter what package of maya is used to test.

here you will find the atiogl.xml i used in the latest tests :



please try yourself , and give some feedback how this works out for you. ( the wireframe scene of the toystore test is still artefacting)

So if we softmod a videocard we should use this new atiogl.xml?

and is it possible to use to 4850's mod them to v8700 or 8750 then put it together as a crossfire?

[xKrNMBoYx]

nvm..i just found out that we cannot run two firepro/gl cards as one which what crossfire is

[CADCAT]

I dont't think so, Crossfire Pro should work well if the mod is successful and you have a HD4xxx card.. You only need to install control center.. Older cards might not work as there is no FireGL Crossfire..

[PC620]

Originally Posted by schoko

well, it seems you have a problem mate..., your results are way beyond what the card actually can deliver in terms of performance. you should check if you don´t have a wrong setting in your CCC. check for the 3d settings, maybe something is wrong there. try the "let application decide" settings, maybe it helps. you should examine whats the probloem there.

butanyway, your framerates should be way higher... bikescene should be around 100 fps... you better check whats the problem there.

Thanks much schoko for suggestion. I will definitely look for the problem. BTW, the 3D setting in CCC was always at default since I don't know how to use it. Perhaps this time, I will start playing with each and test.
Thanks again.

Update 1:
Perhaps it's me not knowing how to setup the Maya2010 for the test. I basically open the bike scene then hit the play button (no config changes). Just now I noticed while it is playing if I zoom in and out with the mouse the frame rate changes and I could get up to 240 fps where the bike was complete off the screen). This is probably not the correct way of testing, right? Anyone? thanks.

Update 2:
So I have tried many things (incl diff drivers, scripts, 3D settings in CCC, and few other stuffs) and got no improvement. My summary is now that all three scripts (schoko @8.634, gellmar and weslay8 @8.603 perform the same based on their scores with the real Maya2010 app (Bike.ma=51fps and Mayascene2.ma=~4-9fps).

I am beginning to think this could be limited by the XP32? But I only noticed only ~26% of CPU power was used. Now I am tempted to upgrade to W7 64-bit but all my apps are 32-bit so probably not a good idea at the moment since I still need this computer to get some work done.

@schoko,
Is it possible that the current performance is the best I am going to get with my XP32? If you can think of anything else I can try, please let me know. Thanks. In the mean time I'll be busy with this

[rogerio]

Originally Posted by schoko

Well rogerio, i have now made some tests with windows7 and the opimized atiogl.xml in win7. and the results clearly show one thing :

the performance with the modified atiogl.xml is mainly dependent to the performance of the cpu.

since win7 has a way better multicore cpu management than xp64 or xp32 the achieved performance boost is even higher with win7.

proof is in the numbers

testbed 1
maya 2009 sp1 - XP 64 HP 8510p with T7700(2.4GHZ),Hd2600 mobility(stock clocks 500/600MHZ), 4GB ram ( only 3GB Ram used to have hibernation working in xp64)

testbed 2
maya 2009 sp1 - Win7 x64 HP 8510p with T7700(2.4GHZ),Hd2600 mobility(stock clocks 500/600MHZ), 4GB ram
btw. additional info: turned off all the eyecandy in win 7 ( best performance setting), basicly it looks like XP now, and it is even that fast or faster in some demanding graphics intensive tasks




Results XP64 (3GB)

bike.ma :
shaded - 52.9 fps
wire - 65.7 fps

carbench :
textured - 7.9 fps
shaded - 9.0 fps
wire - 66.2 fps

mayascene2 :
textured - 5.2 - 10.7 fps
shaded - 6.1 - 15.7 fps
wire - 10.3 - 29.6 fps
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Results Win7 x64 (4GB)

bike.ma :
shaded - 76 - 81 fps
wire - 79 - 83 fps

carbench :
textured - 8.1 fps
shaded - 9.3 fps
wire - 63.9 fps

mayascene2 :
textured - 5.6 - 11.5 fps
shaded - 7.5 - 20.3 fps
wire - 14.7 - 33.5 fps


Windows XP x64 / 3GB Ram
i have note the highest and the lowest fps per scene:



Win7 x64 / 4GB Ram
i have note the highest and the lowest fps per scene:


a hint for some people here at the board :
don´t forget i still have a crippled hd 2600 mobility chip, but when i look at the performance that this sweet little card is able to achieve it does not need to hide behind a desktop quadro fx 4600 or a modded desktop 8800GT(@ quadro fx 3700).


Quite to the contrary what a lot of people said about opengl performance in vista and win7 these results draw the opposite picture.
it seems that the opengl integration in win7 is as perfect a it is in xp. Infact maya uses quite much of the CPU, even when modeling in the standard viewports, und thus it might not surprise that an OS with a very good multicore-cpu integration likeWin7 is speeding up the viewport performance and simply blows good old XP out of the water.

guess these insights leave quite some room for discussions.

Well, I dont agree with you. I think you forgot the 'memory factor' here. IMO, it is not the operational system that has changed changes the results on these testes, but the diferent amount of memory used on each test. 4 > 3 gigas change the results.

You can see how this is true if you look the quadro fx mods results at maya bike scene test. More memory = more frames (when the system-setup is the same).

the same occurs betwen my setup and the setup of Veselinbg. its the 'same', but he have 6 gigas of memory, 4 more than mine system.

It's the only diference, by the way.

[xKrNMBoYx]

ahh so crossfire for 2 4850's will work? great news..now to decide that over 8gb of ram or better harddrive

.:edit:.

also so your sure it will work?..lol

[Sonic]

It doesn't work for me, when i reboot the screen goes to the lowest resolution possible and i cant change it. So it looks like the card is not working.

I followed the following steps:

-Changed the .inf file
- made the patch script
- Run the script with rivatuner
- Installed the driver with the "have disk" method.

I have the following specs:
-Ati Radeon HD 2600 PRO
-winxp 32

The card is an rv630 chip so i tried to soft mod it to Ati Fire GL5600. That didn't work so i tried Ati Fire GL3600 but that didn't work either.

Can somebody help me out? am i missing something here?

[PC620]

Originally Posted by Sonic

It doesn't work for me, when i reboot the screen goes to the lowest resolution possible and i cant change it. So it looks like the card is not working.

I followed the following steps:

-Changed the .inf file
- made the patch script
- Run the script with rivatuner
- Installed the driver with the "have disk" method.

I have the following specs:
-Ati Radeon HD 2600 PRO
-winxp 32

The card is an rv630 chip so i tried to soft mod it to Ati Fire GL5600. That didn't work so i tried Ati Fire GL3600 but that didn't work either.

Can somebody help me out? am i missing something here?

Did you get any errors during the installation?
Did the card show up as 'Workstation' in CCC?

[Sonic]

no strange errors or screens, only that the driver is not signed.

in CCC (catalist control center?) i saw the card listed as ati firegl card so nothing strange there.

the patch file lookes like this

[Common]
SrcFile = ati2mtag.sys
BakFile = ati2mtag.old
MakeCRC = 1
Packed = 1

;script for FireGL driver 8.634 _ win xp_x32

DstVar0 = force ATI FireGL V8650 capabilities
DstVar1 = force ATI FireGL V8600 capabilities
DstVar2 = force ATI FireGL V7600 capabilities
DstVar3 = force ATI FireGL V3600 capabilities
DstVar4 = force ATI FireGL V3600 capabilities
DstVar5 = force ATI FireGL V7700 capabilities
DstVar6 = force RV610GL capabilities
DstVar7 = force FirePro V8700 capabilities
DstVar8 = force FirePro V5700 capabilities
DstVar9 = force FirePro V7750 capabilities
DstVar10 = force FirePro V3750 capabilities


Src0 = FF 75 08 E8 31 5D 00 00 85 C0 74 2E 33 C0 EB 3B
SCM0 = FF FF FF FF 00 00 00 00 FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF
Dst0 = FF 75 08 E8 31 5D 00 00 85 C0 74 2E 33 C0 EB 38


Src1 = 66 3B 46 04 74 51 66 89 46 04
Dst1 = 66 3B 46 04 EB 51 66 89 46 04


Src2 = 66 3B 46 04 74 17 66 89 46 04
Dst2 = 66 3B 46 04 EB 17 66 89 46 04



Src3 = 83 F8 40 75 0B 66 81 BD FC FE FF FF 02 10 74 0C
SCM3 = FF FF FF FF 00 FF FF FF 00 00 FF FF FF FF FF 00
Dst3_0 = 83 F8 40 75 00 66 C7 85 FE FE FF FF 0A 94 74 00
Dst3_1 = 83 F8 40 75 00 66 C7 85 FE FE FF FF 0B 94 74 00
Dst3_2 = 83 F8 40 75 00 66 C7 85 FE FE FF FF 0F 94 74 00
Dst3_3 = 83 F8 40 75 00 66 C7 85 FE FE FF FF 89 95 74 00
Dst3_4 = 83 F8 40 75 00 66 C7 85 FE FE FF FF 89 95 74 00
Dst3_5 = 83 F8 40 75 00 66 C7 85 FE FE FF FF 11 95 74 00
Dst3_6 = 83 F8 40 75 00 66 C7 85 FE FE FF FF C5 94 74 00
Dst3_7 = 83 F8 40 75 00 66 C7 85 FE FE FF FF 56 94 74 00
Dst3_8 = 83 F8 40 75 00 66 C7 85 FE FE FF FF 9E 94 74 00
Dst3_9 = 83 F8 40 75 00 66 C7 85 FE FE FF FF 9C 94 74 00
Dst3_10 = 83 F8 40 75 00 66 C7 85 FE FE FF FF 9F 94 74 00
DCM3 = 00 00 00 00 FF 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 FF

And the inf file (part) looks like this:

;-----------------------------------------------
;----------0907311955-8.634-090729b1-086098C-ATI
;-----------------------------------------------
; ATI Display Information file : ATIIXPAG.INF
; Installation INF for the ATI display driver.
; Copyright(C) 1998-2004 ATI Technologies Inc.
; Windows XP
; Base INF Last Updated 2005/11/01

[Version]
Signature="$Windows NT$"
Provider=%ATI%
ClassGUID={4D36E968-E325-11CE-BFC1-08002BE10318}
Class=Display
DriverVer=07/29/2009, 8.634.0.0000
CatalogFile=CX_86098.CAT

[DestinationDirs]
DefaultDestDir      = 11
ati2mtag.OGL        = 10  ;Windows
ati2mtag.Miniport   = 12  ; drivers
ati2mtag.Display    = 11  ; system32
ati2mtag.OD	    = 11  ; system32

[ControlFlags]
ExcludeFromSelect=*
;
; Driver information
;

[Manufacturer]
%ATI% = ATI.Mfg, NTx86

[ATI.Mfg.NTx86]
"AMD FireStream 9170" = ati2mtag_RV630, PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_9519
"AMD FireStream 9250" = ati2mtag_R7X, PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_9452
"AMD FireStream 9270" = ati2mtag_R7X, PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_9450
"ATI FireGL V3600" = ati2mtag_RV630GL, PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_9589
"ATI FireGL V5600" = ati2mtag_RV630GL, PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_958C
"ATI FireGL V7600" = ati2mtag_R600GL, PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_940F
"ATI FireGL V7700" = ati2mtag_RV630GL, PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_9511
"ATI FireGL V8600" = ati2mtag_R600GL, PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_940B
"ATI FireGL V8650" = ati2mtag_R600GL, PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_940A
"ATI FirePro 2260" = ati2mtag_RV610, PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_95CF
"ATI FirePro 2260 " = ati2mtag_RV610, PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_95CE
"ATI FirePro 2450" = ati2mtag_RV610, PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_95CD
"ATI FirePro V3700 (FireGL)" = ati2mtag_RV620GL, PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_95CC
"ATI FirePro V3750 (FireGL)" = ati2mtag_R7XGL, PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_949F
"ATI FirePro V5700 (FireGL)" = ati2mtag_R7XGL, PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_949E
"ATI FirePro V7750 (FireGL)" = ati2mtag_R7XGL, PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_949C
"ATI FirePro V8700 (FireGL)" = ati2mtag_R7XGL, PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_9456
"ATI FirePro V8750 (FireGL)" = ati2mtag_R7XGL, PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_9444
;
; General installation section
;

Did i do it correct?

[PC620]

@Sonic:

the patch looks Ok as far I can tell. Did you uninstall existing driver, reboot into safe mode, then run driver sweep, then boot normal then install your new patch? I found out that this is critical especially on ATI cards. I have gone through rebootings so many time in the past few days as I was testing different patches.

Another way to check if the mod works or not is to run SpecViewPerf to compare before and after scores. Have you done this? good luck...

[Sonic]

I didn't uninstall the previous one.
its pretty easy to tell if it works or not because the computer starts up with lowest resolution possible (640x480 4 bit)

I will try the driver sweep, see if that has effect