Go Back   nV News Forums > Graphics Card Forums > NVIDIA Legacy Graphics Cards

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 06-22-03, 01:31 AM   #1
chupacabras
Registered User
 
chupacabras's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 9
Default Should my 5800 Ultra be this SLOW?

I recently got my hands on a Leadtek A300 5800 Ultra, and I cant keep a constant 30 frames in Unreal 2. (checked with fraps) Often frames drop to single digits as well. All settings in Unreal 2 are on high, except character detail, and Intellisample is on performance, while D3D mipmapping quality is on blend. Needless to say, i'm a little disappointed, any ideas what it could be? I'm using the 43.45 Detonator FX's, but have also tried the 44.65 betas. Other than raising my 3dmark score, I didnt notice any differences with them.. and if i had to say, I think were even slower..

I'm running the game with 4XAA and 8XAF with texture sharpening on. AGP aperature size is 64mb, and i'm running VIA's Hyperion 4.45. Unreal2 isnt the only thing a little slow, is dawn ultra supposed to be choppy on this card? Also, I tried the ATI animusic demo, which is choppy as well.

I get about 4000 3dmark2003 with the 43.45 and 5000 with the beta 43.65s. I also get ~13,000 in 2001.

I know 256 isnt that much ram, but I doubt that's the problem. My friend running his 9500pro gets 90 fps. BTW system was freshly formatted after I got the card, so it was wiped just a few days ago. Also, my case is very well ventilated, with multiple case fans, and temps shouldnt be an issue, since i've been running the case open.

My system:
Athlon XP@2150mhz
256MB DDR@180mhz
Leadtek A300
MSI KT3 Ultra2
420W Thermaltake PS
Windows XP pro.
Any ideas? Thanks.

Last edited by chupacabras; 06-22-03 at 04:19 AM.
chupacabras is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-03, 03:12 AM   #2
Tsunami
Geforce fx 5900 ulta
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 89
Default

No it definatly shouldn't be that slow i have a ti4600 at the moment and i run everything on high with 2XAA and 8XAF and i had around 30 fps so a 5800 ultra should be about 60fps
all i can think of is that Vsync must be on
__________________
Intel pentium 4 proccessor (2400mhz)
Geforce fx 5900 ultra (256 mb)
Elite group SIS motherboard
1024 pc 2700 ddr ram
Nvidia
Tsunami is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-03, 03:27 AM   #3
yoladude
Mr. Hobo
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 307
Default

why r u doing BETA 43.65s or whatever when the 44.03s are already out??? they're supposed to improve performance in fx-based cards a lot. go to nvidia and download it; cant hurt, anyways.
__________________
AthlonXP 2200+ / 1024mb PC2100 / Geforce DDR (soon to be 6800le (soon to be 6800+))
yoladude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-03, 04:03 AM   #4
chupacabras
Registered User
 
chupacabras's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 9
Default

That was a typo, i meant the 44.65 betas. I just tried the 44.03's and still much of the same problem. Vsync off, everything on high in game, in settings on "high performance" in the display, with highest quality mip mapping, 4xAA/8xAF.

On the third mission, the terraforming bioplanet, on the surface i get around 40-50fps with no one but me around. When there's combat with other characters, up close the frames drop to about 20 or less.
chupacabras is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-03, 04:11 AM   #5
Uttar
Registered User
 
Uttar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,354
Send a message via AIM to Uttar Send a message via Yahoo to Uttar
Default

Did you try and see the different in FPS with 2x AA? You could be hitting your 128MB lvideo memory imit, causing a drastic performance hit if there's a LOT of textures...


Uttar
Uttar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-03, 04:17 AM   #6
Dazz
"TOON ARMY!"
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Newcastle, United Kingdom
Posts: 5,138
Send a message via AIM to Dazz
Default

I don't know 8x AA & 8x AF is a real performance killer!!!
__________________
"Never interupt your enemy when he is making a mistake."

Processor: AMD Phenom II X6 1090T Black Edition @ 4.25GHz
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD3
Graphics: ASUS ENGTX470
Memory: 4GB Kingston HyperX Blu PC12800 DDR3
Monitor: LG E2260V-PN Full HD WLED 22" & DELL 20" 2005FPW,
Power: Coolermaster Silent Pro Modular 850w PSU
Sound: Logitech Z5500 Digital.
Cooling: Thermalright Silver Arrow.
1st Storage: Kingston V100 SSDNow128GB SSD
2nd Storage: Samsung Spinpoint F1 750GB
Dazz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-03, 04:30 AM   #7
chupacabras
Registered User
 
chupacabras's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 9
Default

Running 4xAA/8xAF, not 8xAA.
(running 44.03 now)

With 2xAA/8xAF same performance. 50ish when no ones shooting, dropping to 20 under combat, and under 10 when there's combat and rather large explosions. All detail settings in Unreal2 are on the highest quality, and it doesnt seem to make much of a difference setting the display to high performance or high quality.

I'll try it with AA off and AF off, on 'quality' mode now.
------

Wow something's definitely not right. with AA off and AF off, and image quality in the display properties on 'quality', it idles at around 60ish, but when the combat starts it has the same problem: 20is fps under combat and 10ish when there's an explosion.

What could be wrong?

For reference i tried another game.. GTA3, at 1024 like everything else.

Again highest quality, but no AA and no AF, the game's 120fps max, and drops to 65fps at its lowest point, most of the time saying around 90fps. Are these numbers normal?

Last edited by chupacabras; 06-22-03 at 04:42 AM.
chupacabras is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-03, 04:55 AM   #8
Geforce4ti4200
I luv mah ti4200 340/700
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 916
Default

13k marks is sad, I get that with a ti4200 and a slower cpu than yours. also ut2003 is cpu intensive, meaning the problem is not with your video card, the video card is waiting for the cpu. Your cpu is performing like my old 1GHz tbird. Maybe your os, ram or mobo is messed up? can you link me to your score of 13k?
__________________
I have retired from 3dmark! Game time!
cpu: Tbred AIUHB xp2000+ unlocked and overclocked(1.75 volts) to 2.09GHz(used to do 2.47GHz)
gpu: Several, see 3dmark scores!
ram: Mushkin pc3500 level II, dual channel 2x256mb(sold) I now have corsair value that performs better for less than half the price!
mobo: abit nf7-s, shes fasssssst!
hdd: Seagate 80GB 7200rpm
3dmark2001 scores:
TI4200 330/700 on nf7-s 16490
TI4200 128mb on kt400 15580
TI500 at 265/600 core won't V-mod 12713
TI200 at 250/525 w00t! 12k club! 12123
MX440 at 330/550 10k possible if V-mod 9305
MX420 at 333/183 poor ocing ram 5258
Geforce2 TI at 250/220 darn! sdr verson! 4740
Geforce4ti4200 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 06-22-03, 09:09 AM   #9
EMunEeE
Me
 
EMunEeE's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 550
Send a message via AIM to EMunEeE
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Geforce4ti4200
13k marks is sad, I get that with a ti4200 and a slower cpu than yours. also ut2003 is cpu intensive, meaning the problem is not with your video card, the video card is waiting for the cpu. Your cpu is performing like my old 1GHz tbird. Maybe your os, ram or mobo is messed up? can you link me to your score of 13k?
Well anyone can hit 13K with any GF4 and higher generatio card with a fat FSB

The 5800 should be that slow with 4XAA and 8xAF...its crippled by its 128bit bus.
__________________
EMunXT
ABIT AN8 Ultra (nForce4 Ultra) || AMD Athlon64 X2 3800+ || 2GB OCZ Performance PC3200 DDR SDRAM || ATI All-in-Wonder Radeon X1800 XL 256MB || Creative Soundblaster Audigy 2 || 120GB & 80GB Seagate HDs || Lite-On DVD Drive & DVD RW || Antec P160WF Case || Antec TruePower 2.0 430W PSU || Samsung 204T (20.1") & Hitachi CML174SX (17") LCDs

I'm black, I'm still sexy, my computer is now sexier though.
EMunEeE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-03, 09:15 AM   #10
The Baron
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

it's the RAM, stupid. running XP with 256 is not a great idea, and trying to run games like U2 with 256 is just a really really bad idea.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-03, 09:18 AM   #11
saturnotaku
Apple user. Deal with it.
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: The 'burbs, IL USA
Posts: 12,502
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by The Baron
it's the RAM, stupid. running XP with 256 is not a great idea, and trying to run games like U2 with 256 is just a really really bad idea.
I hear that. A friend of mine has a Ti4600 and when he upgraded to 512 from 256, he saw at least a 30% increase in his UT2003 performance.
saturnotaku is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-03, 09:21 AM   #12
Kruno
TypeDef's assistant
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,641
Send a message via ICQ to Kruno Send a message via AIM to Kruno
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by The Baron
it's the RAM, stupid. running XP with 256 is not a great idea, and trying to run games like U2 with 256 is just a really really bad idea.
I stripped my 768MB ram down to 128 and my performance nose dived by 6fps in UT2003 and this is worst case scenario. Not only that but I had it downclocked to 133MHz from 160MHz.

I was still running at an average of 75fps in Face3 map with 5 bots.
__________________
"Never before has any voice dared to utter the words of that tongue in Imladris, Mr. Anderson" - Elrond LOTR
Kruno is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Gnome3 with composite is very slow on Geforce FX 5200 with 173.14.31 driver Artox NVIDIA Linux 0 05-26-12 10:33 AM
Very slow X startup Jeremy NVIDIA Linux 96 05-23-03 10:11 AM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:33 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 1998 - 2014, nV News.