Poor performance on a GeForceFX 5200!

[fuxifuxi]

I took a closer look at my card and it has only 4 memory chips. That will make it a 64-bit card, no ? Also the memories are Infineon HYB25D256 160BT, which, according to Infineon data sheets are working at 333 MHz.
Therefore it is proven without doubt that Asus lied about the card's memory clock speed...

[aapo]

Originally posted by fuxifuxi
I took a closer look at my card and it has only 4 memory chips. That will make it a 64-bit card, no ?

Yes, it is 64-bit then. On the other hand, they don't seem to claim 128-bit bus anywhere in their ads, so I suppose it's legit but very poor advertising policy.


Also the memories are Infineon HYB25D256 160BT, which, according to Infineon data sheets are working at 333 MHz.
Therefore it is proven without doubt that Asus lied about the card's memory clock speed...

That seems to be true. However, it's very strange that a company as big as Asus would make a clear outright lie about their product.

[ChrisRay]

Originally posted by fuxifuxi
I took a closer look at my card and it has only 4 memory chips. That will make it a 64-bit card, no ? Also the memories are Infineon HYB25D256 160BT, which, according to Infineon data sheets are working at 333 MHz.
Therefore it is proven without doubt that Asus lied about the card's memory clock speed...


Ouch, That is a 64 bit card, I mean the memory already lowered to 333 mhz and it at 64 bit.. How much bandwith is that anyway? Cant be much.. I highly reccomend you take it back.

We have a 5200 Non Ultra with 128 Bit memory That has the default clock speeds. It replaced a geforce 4 MX here and it seems to be going pretty well. Definately not the way you describe yours..

[fuxifuxi]

My GeForceFX 5200 has a (theoretical) bandwidth of 2.7 GB/s, while my
older GeForce256 DDR has a 4.8 GB/s bandwidth (128 bit memory DDR at 300 MHz).

It seems I have invested in a downgrade :D

[ChrisRay]

Originally posted by fuxifuxi
My GeForceFX 5200 has a (theoretical) bandwidth of 2.7 GB/s, while my
older GeForce256 DDR has a 4.8 GB/s bandwidth (128 bit memory DDR at 300 MHz).

It seems I have invested in a downgrade :D


Obviously you werent aware. It's really easy to have that happen actually. I just wish companies would follow Nvidia reference guidelines and not make these piece of garbage 64 bit FX 5200s..

[cthellis]

Hence why you avoid the issue entirely, and whatever 5200 you might want, instead buy a comparatively priced Ti4200. The low-end cards tend to make me ill... The Ti's have been a solid line through and through, and picking up even the lowest-priced of them seems to be a much better option than anything else.

[fuxifuxi]

I want an FX card because of improved pixel shader and vertex shader support. I even expect support for glSlang (in hardware) when it will be available. Since all GeForce 4 and below are DirectX 8.1 cards or below I will lack the functionality I need. I am a developer. I do not want extreme performance. I just want to see how things work. My 5200 card supports fully opengl 1.0, 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, (and another 100 extensions) which can not be said for GeForce 4TI or below.

I am happy with all the features my card has, I just have a problem with being lied by Asus and my seller. They have advertised some memory clock frequencyes and they have sold me a card with different frequencyes. That means that I was robbed, in a way.
This is why tommorow I will try to return my card. Stay tuned for the result.

[mixsetup]

I'll be buying another card when I can and after this I won't be buying ASUS anything.

[Edge]

Yeah if they outright lied about the memory speeds then you should be offered a refund. At the very least that's false advertising, and it sounds EXACTLY like the problem I had with my GF2MX card (which ran at Voodoo3 speeds). Though it does seem VERY odd that Asus would make a card like that and lie about memory speeds and such...are you SURE it's an Asus card? It's quite possible that they simply packaged a crappy generic card in an Asus box and sold it as an "Asus FX5200". I just don't want people to avoid Asus cards because some really dishonest seller lied about it.

Where did you buy the card from, if you don't mind me asking. My GF2MX just came from some random computer retailer on the internet. I'd recommend Newegg, they're the only place that I've never had a problem with (they even took back a fried motherboard after the warrenty was up!), and they have a 128 meg, 128 bit (at least I'm pretty sure) FX5200 availible for $71 shipped. Might be something to keep in mind in case your seller is willing to refund your money.

[mixsetup]

yeah it's an ASUS I bought it from a computer shop here in Tasmania (Australia) As here the ATI cards cost more. Looks like I will be saving again for another card And I'de sugest anyone elsethat has bought these cards if they want more performance to do the same.

[Gator]

Originally posted by fuxifuxi
I want an FX card because of improved pixel shader and vertex shader support. I even expect support for glSlang (in hardware) when it will be available. Since all GeForce 4 and below are DirectX 8.1 cards or below I will lack the functionality I need. I am a developer. I do not want extreme performance. I just want to see how things work. My 5200 card supports fully opengl 1.0, 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, (and another 100 extensions) which can not be said for GeForce 4TI or below...

ok, now I understand why GF4TI wont work for you. And since you say ATI is so much more expensive, I'd recommend either an FX5700 ultra, or FX5900 non-ultra (which sells for $210us). Not sure how much you're looking to spend, but don't waste your money on the slower 5200 or 5600, both of which are outperformed by the GF4TI. And the 5800 is loud, expensive, and underpowered so scratch that too.

Let us know what you choose: 5700 or 5900 or something else

[mixsetup]

Well I'm not sure where fuxifuxi lives but here in Aus a GF4Ti retail is about $200 a ATI 9600 is $400 odd and a FX 5900 non pro is about $600 and more and ATI 9800 is $750 and up.
So I might wait for a while and look at buying a ATI 9600 as with 2 kids that suck your money dry that will take months to save for that. Thanks heaps all.

[fuxifuxi]

I've send it to my seller and I will be rufunded. I can start shopping again
:D

[Edge]

Ahh, good to hear you'll be getting your money back. Say, I noticed this card on Newegg's site (if you live in an area they'll ship to), it says it has 128 megs of 4ns, 128-bit memory, so it should be at least twice as fast as your other FX5200 card. Though the one user review on it mentions that it's slower then a TI500 card...but I'm not sure how much slower and that would be within the normal performence range of an FX5200.
http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProduct.asp?DEPA=1&order=description&submit=property&catalog=48&mfrcode=0&propertycodevalue=4635,3668&keywords=&minprice=&maxprice=&description=A340&order=Description

Not sure what the difference is between the top one and the bottom one though...but for $65 shipped I don't think it's a bad deal at all. You even get a free Newegg t-shirt or something with it. $65 for a graphics card AND a t-shirt, can't beat that :)

Also, I noticed on Newegg's site that they had a few "lite" FX5200 cards with 64 bit memory. It looks like your old card was one of the lite versions.

[fuxifuxi]

Hi !

My old card was a 64-bit card. However, I have chosen to to take my money back, but instead they gave me a Inno3D GeforceFX 5200 with a 128-bit memory interface and with 128MB memory. I thought that was a good deal. They have even agreed to upgrade my card to something else, if I would pay the difference, but my budget is real tight so I can't afford to spend even another 10 $. That's a shame !... but my seller was VERY nice.
I can't wait to get my hands of the other card ... :D

[ChrisRay]

Originally posted by fuxifuxi
Hi !

My old card was a 64-bit card. However, I have chosen to to take my money back, but instead they gave me a Inno3D GeforceFX 5200 with a 128-bit memory interface and with 128MB memory. I thought that was a good deal. They have even agreed to upgrade my card to something else, if I would pay the difference, but my budget is real tight so I can't afford to spend even another 10 $. That's a shame !... but my seller was VERY nice.
I can't wait to get my hands of the other card ... :D


Awesome, Be sure to show us the differences between the 64 bit card and the 128 bit card with a few benches :)

[Edge]

Ahh, good to hear you'll be getting a REAL FX5200 card then. It's strange...it seems like almost every budget card out there gets an even cheaper, slower version of it put out by SOME company. I never thought I'd have to avoid generic brands on something like a video card. Though oddly all the features and everything is the same, they just make it like half the speed. You'd think if they're going ot be cheap about it, they could just take some old technology and make it faster (like the GF2TI).

[aapo]

Originally posted by fuxifuxi
, but instead they gave me a Inno3D GeforceFX 5200 with a 128-bit memory interface and with 128MB memory. I thought that was a good deal.

Congrats! That card should meet your needs, i.e. at least GF3 performance and DX9 pixel shaders. :)

[fuxifuxi]

Here is a benchmark of my new card. (I bought a 64MB card, not an 128 MB card. They have refunded me, but I couldn.t find the 128MB version of the card)

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=6956119

The fillrate problems have vanished

[Edge]

Yup, for a 550 mhz processor that's a pretty good score. On my Duron 750 with a GF3 I used to get around 3000 3dmarks. Fillrate seems much better now, especially in the single-texture tests. Looks like you got a REAL FX5200 card now.

Oh, and how do you get 3dmark2001se to work with DirectX9? Mine always complains that it needs DX8.1 installed. I'd like to compair my GF4ti's bandwidth to yours and see what the difference is.

Oh, and if you don't play many games, the 64 megs of memory shouldn't effect you too much. I think there's only a few out now that even benefit from the extra 64 megs of ram. Though for a developer I guess it would be nice if you have memory leaks or something ;)

[Gator]

fillrate went from 249 to 786! :) That's definetly an improvement, glad to hear your happy now. I won't lie to you though, 3761 is a pretty low 3dmark score by today's standards, but for a PIII @ 616mhz it's too be expected, and as you mentioned your not playing many games anyway. Cool deal http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/images/icons/icon14.gif

[mariuz]

Originally posted by Gator
fillrate went from 249 to 786! :) That's definetly an improvement, glad to hear your happy now. I won't lie to you though, 3761 is a pretty low 3dmark score by today's standards, but for a PIII @ 616mhz it's too be expected, and as you mentioned your not playing many games anyway. Cool deal http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/images/icons/icon14.gif
Yah compared with scores of a ti4400+baron in the sig are a little low ,
But i think is not that bad as a card
Have a friend and he likes it , some new
*dx9 ?* effects are in the new card (5200)
Some old games FiFa ('98) doesn't work :(

[CaptNKILL]

Yeesh, I must have tweaked the hell out of my old comp.... I had an Athlon 750Mhz (Slot A 200Mhz FSB) with 256Mb PC-133 and a Geforce 2 GTS 32Mb (overclocked a little bit). I got 4000-4100 3dMarks as my highest.... how are these faster comps getting lower scores?