PDA

View Full Version : BGF 256mb GF FX 5600 bad core clock


Maximumdreads
05-05-03, 03:08 PM
I just purchased a BFG 256mb GF 5600 FX board and the specs say that the core clock should run at 325 but mine only registers at 270, i called their tech support and they just told me to excahange it wich now i have to drive 30 miles again BS!!!

So FYI, and is anyone having similar problems? know of a quick fix?

MaximumDreads.

garikfox
05-05-03, 03:17 PM
I have one also but PNY , That it only goes too 325 when its switched to 3D or a game. But yer fine im sure. Congrats too.

DorXtar
05-05-03, 03:18 PM
Ummm...

Dip the thing in liquid nitrogen and fire it up.

Overclock.

Repeat as needed.

mreman4k
05-05-03, 05:15 PM
Whats the point in having 256MB of RAM with a 128bit bus???

garikfox
05-05-03, 05:47 PM
Not sure im sure its a sales thing for now, i might be wrong though.

mreman4k
05-05-03, 08:10 PM
Originally posted by garikfox
Not sure im sure its a sales thing for now, i might be wrong though.

It probaly is a sales thing because chances are if the game needs 256MB of memory then it certainly will not run decently on a FX 5600 Ultra.

marcocom
05-06-03, 05:06 PM
Originally posted by mreman4k
It probaly is a sales thing because chances are if the game needs 256MB of memory then it certainly will not run decently on a FX 5600 Ultra.

lol thats funny cuz your kind of right


graphics memory allows for just more acreage to store information. no increase in speed. so the more graphics memory you have, the higher resolution you can support comfortably or higher color depth (more pixels on screen or more information per pixel - usually exponentially or doubled every step)

Good also for hi-resolution desktops for content creation workstations.

but im not sure about GPU limitations on crunching hi resolutions and where the overhead lies there except that its again, double the pixels on screen and so if its bottlenecking at the GPU , all the acreage in the world to store information isnt going to help.

but then were not talking about a GPU that we really understand too clearly and could very well be programmable to streamline that thoroughput proper.

is that a 13 micron chip like 5800?

mreman4k
05-06-03, 06:05 PM
Yes it is a .13 micron chip.

Geforce4ti4200
05-07-03, 05:41 AM
return it and spend a bit more on a radeon9700 pro :afro2:

symtrax
05-07-03, 07:16 AM
Sticky: No Ati Discussions In Here!

mreman4k
05-07-03, 08:22 AM
Originally posted by symtrax
Sticky: No Ati Discussions In Here!

Sticky: My nuts in your mouth:p

Martrox
05-07-03, 10:06 AM
These things suck...... check out this:

http://www.tech-report.com/reviews/2003q2/geforcefx-5600/index.x?pg=1



Performance-wise, the Radeon 9500 and 9600 Pro lay down a beating on the GeForce FX 5600, even when the latter is equipped with 256MB of memory. As far as features go, there are few practical ways that the Radeons are really lacking. The Radeon 9500 and 9600 Pro only support pixel shader programs up to 64 instructions in length (which is the limit of the pixel shader 2.0 specification), and they only offer 96-bit pixel shader precision rather than the 128-bit precision available to the GeForce FX 5600. However, those "onlys" have very little practical value. After all, it will be some time before games and applications start taking advantage of pixel and vertex shader versions 2.0 with regularly, and the 3DMark03 image quality tests suggest that the GeForce FX 5600 doesn't have the horsepower to take full advantage of the extra pixel shader precision it has available.

creedamd
05-07-03, 11:05 AM
Originally posted by Martrox
These things suck...... check out this:

http://www.tech-report.com/reviews/2003q2/geforcefx-5600/index.x?pg=1

glad you pointed it out first, cause the dood drove 30miles for the disappointment.. but I ain't one to crap...

Dazz
05-07-03, 02:12 PM
I noticed the memory clocks lower then even a regular one 500MHz Vs 550MHz.