PDA

View Full Version : Aopen Geforce FX5200


Pages : [1] 2

the_wounded
11-11-03, 07:25 AM
Yesterday i bought me the Aopen Geforce FX5200 to replace my old Point Of View Geforce 3 TI200, but in both linux and windows the FX 5200 is slow as hell, in unrealtournament for example with the geforce FX5200 i get like 30fps and with the geforce 3 i get 120 fps, this happens in windows XP and in Linux, does anybody know what might be the problem, i tried several drivers, even reinstalled windows and linux but nothing seems to help, so i put my old geforce3 back in to be able to play games like ut2k3 and bf1942 coz they just won't run with the fx5200.

System Info:
Mainbord: Gigabyte GA-8SIML
Proc: Intel Pentium IV 2,53Ghz
Ramm: 512MB DDR PC2700
HD: Seagate 120 GB

ragejg
11-11-03, 07:33 AM
http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=10660&highlight=tooth+and+nail

http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=13320&highlight=tooth+and+nail

http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=20417

:)

the_wounded
11-11-03, 07:43 AM
Ok i read those, but it can't be that it so much slower, a difference of 90fps with a geforce 3 ti 200 seems like there must be a problem.

saturnotaku
11-11-03, 07:55 AM
Originally posted by the_wounded
Ok i read those, but it can't be that it so much slower, a difference of 90fps with a geforce 3 ti 200 seems like there must be a problem.

Yeah, the problem is that card. It looks like you bought the 5200 non-ultra which means you probably got one with a 64-bit memory bus, which will get killed by just about anything save for a GeForce2 MX.

Take it back and buy something else. You can get an FX 5900 non-ultra for $200 now if you know where to look.

ragejg
11-11-03, 08:12 AM
Dang you Sat, ... you and your "high priced off the get-go" recommendations!!! :cool: :cool: ...We don't make commision here!! :p

Want a kick in the pants for a little more of a bargain price?? I'd have to recommend a 5600 Ultra at this point... they can be had for as little as around $120 or so... Heck, give it a month and 5700 non-ultra's will be at that price as well... hopefully... and 5700 Non-U's do indeed keep up with 5600U's, and even spank em in some tests...

Sorry to try and sway your choice of vidcard, d00d, but your 64 bit memory equipped FX just does not scale at all regarding cpu speed... it would run at the same speed if it was in a 1.0ghz Duron... GF2mx's do the same thing...

Gator
11-11-03, 08:13 AM
5200 non-ultra with 64bit memory, I agree that's probably what you got, they suck! :p

Return that card! Don't walk, run! And I'm assuming you're on a budget, so for you I'd recommend a R9600Pro or FX5600Ultra rev2.0. Both cards run about $130us

saturnotaku
11-11-03, 08:16 AM
Originally posted by ragejg
Dang you Sat, ... you and your "high priced off the get-go" recommendations!!! :cool: :cool: ...We don't make commision here!! :p

If I was going to go high-priced from the start, we'd be going 9800 Pro/5900 Ultra. But since he uses Linux, that pretty much keeps him with NVIDIA. The 5600 Ultra rev. 2 would be good for the money.

BTW, did you ever send me the money for the CPU because I haven't received it yet.

ragejg
11-11-03, 08:43 AM
YGPM Sat... :)

///THREAD UN-HIJACKED///

Edge
11-11-03, 10:19 AM
Well it certainly sounds like you get a 64-bit card (a lot of those things flying around nowadays), so definatly try to return it and get a different card. As I mentioned in the other thread, there's a pretty decent-looking FX5200 card over at Newegg for $65 shipped that advertises 128 bit memory bus. It looks pretty good, check it out there:
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
The FX5200 isn't TOO bad of a card, it comes in between a GF3 and a GF4 in performence, but it has a few nice features and the price is right. If you have the extra money though, I'd say get a 9600 (NOT an "SE" version).

saturnotaku
11-11-03, 12:38 PM
Originally posted by Edge
If you have the extra money though, I'd say get a 9600 (NOT an "SE" version).

He uses Linux so that rules out ATI for all intents and purposes.

Edge
11-11-03, 02:37 PM
Oh yeah...I forgot that ATI didn't have any Linux drivers...damn. Bah, you'd think a company as big as ATI would be able to write drivers for linux, even 3dfx and Matrox had good Linux drivers back in the day.

Oh well, I guess a 5600 would do fine, even though it would be better if you can get a 5900. Though if you're looking in the sub-$100 catagory, then you're pretty much limited to the FX5200 (which isn't actually a bad option).

Gator
11-11-03, 03:27 PM
Originally posted by Edge
Oh yeah...I forgot that ATI didn't have any Linux drivers...

ATI has Linux drivers

http://www.ati.com/support/drivers/linux/radeon-linux.html?type=linux&prodType=graphic&prod=productsLINUXdriver&submit.x=16&submit.y=5

Edge
11-11-03, 04:37 PM
Are they any good though? If everyone says that if you're using Linux to get an Nvidia card, there's probably a good reason for it...

the_wounded
11-12-03, 09:26 AM
Yeah the new ati drivers work fine, and coz of this crap i might even buy me one, I at least expected it to be faster than my geforce 3 but it isn't and ati cards in the same price rane are so i might buy one of them.

the_wounded
11-12-03, 09:29 AM
Oh well, I guess a 5600 would do fine, even though it would be better if you can get a 5900. Though if you're looking in the sub-$100 catagory, then you're pretty much limited to the FX5200 (which isn't actually a bad option).

its a bad option, the 5200 sux ass, can't even play ut2k3 with it even the old ut is shocky when playing it at some decent detail level..

Malfunction
11-12-03, 09:47 AM
Originally posted by the_wounded
its a bad option, the 5200 sux ass, can't even play ut2k3 with it even the old ut is shocky when playing it at some decent detail level..

Mine plays games well. I don't expect it to run anything higher than 1024x768 at the moment, but hell... it is inexpensive for sure. I am usually above 60fps for the games that I play though and that isn't many. I primarily stick to BF1942/Desert Combat and MotoGP 2. It plays those just fine. *DC especially since they fixed the maps with the latest 5L update.

Would I recommend it? Not for what I paid for it at the time, yet I got a great card that O/C's higher than most and does what I expected it to. It just filled a void to me because I wasn't sure if I wanted a 5900 or 9800 at the time. It is still filling that void even today as I decide between a 9800Pro and a 9800XT. I decided to hold off on getting either 9800Pro or XT till January or Febuary 04'.

However understand this, I got the Evga FX5200 Ultra : [Model#: 128-A8-N308-T4]. It does a fine job for what I use it for and continues to be the right decision when I primarily wanted to see what I was missing when all I used was ATi. *hindsight - I wish I hadn't given up my 9700Pro! :banghead:

Oh well, there will always be someone realizing they should have spent more time researching a product before purchasing. So the life cycle goes on...

Peace,

:)

the_wounded
11-12-03, 09:54 AM
Well according to sites as tomshardware the 5200 sposed to be better than a geforce 3 ti200 but it definatly isnt.

Malfunction
11-12-03, 10:06 AM
Originally posted by the_wounded
Well according to sites as tomshardware the 5200 sposed to be better than a geforce 3 ti200 but it definatly isnt.

Again, I will reiterate. People who didn't put in the leg work about the FX5200 would have realized this. While everyone was reviewing the Albatron, Asus or Gainward, not one of them reviewed the Evga. Around the time I purchase this card, the Evga 5900 Ultra was the best 5900 Ultra to get. So going off that and reviews I had read along with read people who bought it and how they responded, I realized this was the one to have.

And in investigating that way, I have not been disappointed since. Don't believe me, go over to Newegg.com and look up FX5200 Ultra. Everyone and their mother suggested getting a Ultra because the non ultra was a dog.

See how many liked the ones by the IHV's I listed. Then take a look at the one I got and read what the users thought. :)

Made it easy for ya: http://secure.newegg.com/app/CustratingReview.asp?item=14-130-149

Peace,

;)

Edge
11-12-03, 10:09 AM
Almost every benchmark shows the FX5200 coming in between a GF3 and a GF4, but they only tested FULL FLEDGED FX5200, the ones with 128 bit memory bus. It's the same deal as the 9600se: it's going to be slower then an 8500 with only a 64 bit memory bus. You can't assume that because the card YOU have was a cheapy model that every other version is as well, otherwise people would consider the 9800 to be crap because of the SE version. If you had a full 128 bit FX5200, then it would be plenty fast.

aapo
11-12-03, 10:11 AM
Originally posted by the_wounded
Well according to sites as tomshardware the 5200 sposed to be better than a geforce 3 ti200 but it definatly isnt.

The performance depends quite heavily on the memory bus. The FX5200 with 128 bit memory bus clocked at 400 MHz DDR is is faster than gf3ti200, but the 64 bit variant of the FX5200 (which no-one benchmarked and everyone seems to sell now) is certainly a lot slower. It can have less than half of the assumed performance, if the memory is underclocked. So all in all, a real FX5200 128 bit has acceptable speed with low price - it's actually a decent card for the money.

However, you're better off with R9600. The new Linux drivers are acceptable, even though they aren't as good and bug-free as nVidia's. If you can live with them, the choice is easy. R9600 beats the crap out of your gf3ti200 and FX5200. :D

the_wounded
11-12-03, 11:03 AM
Is there a way too see what version i got, if it's 64 or 128 bit?

Malfunction
11-12-03, 11:09 AM
Originally posted by the_wounded
Is there a way too see what version i got, if it's 64 or 128 bit?

Need the model #. Ofcourse, I have also heard that if you run 3DMark2001SE and pay close attention to the fill rate test: Single and Multi-texturing, it would be obvious.

However, I believe locating the model number (not product Model - ie vague) you will have great luck or help us help you figure it out. :)

Peace,

:)

the_wounded
11-12-03, 11:29 AM
Well i looked at the website from Aopen but they aint telling me the bandwith of the memory on their site.

Info about the card:
Aopen Aeolus FX5200-DV128
s/n: 9105210343 33502588LZB2
p/n/: 91.05210.343

and on the graphics card there is a number 2 dun know what that one is but it is:
FX5200
03908-11
44.052FK.011

Malfunction
11-12-03, 11:52 AM
Translated (http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&u=http://www.3dchip.de/grafikkarten/aopen-gfx.htm&prev=/search%3Fq%3DAopen%2BFX%2B5200%2B128%2Bbit%26hl%3D en%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26oe%3DUTF-8)

You should be able to figure out which one you have now I believe.

Peace,

:)

Gator
11-12-03, 11:56 AM
Originally posted by the_wounded
Well i looked at the website from Aopen but they aint telling me the bandwith of the memory on their site.

Info about the card:
Aopen Aeolus FX5200-DV128
s/n: 9105210343 33502588LZB2
p/n/: 91.05210.343

and on the graphics card there is a number 2 dun know what that one is but it is:
FX5200
03908-11
44.052FK.011

According to NewEgg.com that card has 64bit memory :( (yuck)