Go Back   nV News Forums > Linux Support Forums > NVIDIA Linux

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-02-03, 06:02 AM   #1
JayC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: London, UK
Posts: 5
Default GeForce FX 5900 Ultra, poor performance

Hi

I just got a new PNY GeForce FX 5900 Ultra (256M DDR RAM, VGA/VIVO/DVI) today to replace my aging GeForce 4 Ti 4200 64M. With much eagerness I pulled out my old card and installed the new one, plugged everything in and turned on...

And found it to be slower than my Ti4200! With glxgears as a basic benchmark (and the results confirmed by playing a few 3D games), I got about 2000fps whereas I can achieve 5700fps on my Ti4200. I didn't expect to achieve full performance because I'm currently restricted to AGP 4x (a new motherboard is due in a couple of weeks), but that's almost unplayable.

My setup is a 1.7GHz Athlon XP 2100+, 1GB PC3200 CL2.5 DDRRAM, Gigabyte GA-7VRXP KT333 motherboard. I'm using a 2.4.21 kernel and NVidia 1.0-4496 drivers, the first to support the FX 5900 cards (I tried earlier drivers and just got a blank screen ). glxinfo seems to suggest everything is in working order.

[jay@viper jay]$ cat /proc/driver/nvidia/agp/status
Status: Enabled
Driver: AGPGART
AGP Rate: 4x
Fast Writes: Enabled
SBA: Enabled

I've put the Ti4200 back in for now, and everything's fine. But if anyone has some suggestions for squeezing better performance out of the FX 5900 Ultra, I'm all ears. Thanks.
JayC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-03, 05:43 AM   #2
JayC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: London, UK
Posts: 5
Default

*bump*

Hmm, no-one has any ideas?

I'm sure there must be a few people running 5900's under Linux, or who've at least tried. Could you share your configurations with me?
JayC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-03, 09:08 AM   #3
phlunkie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 16
Default

A question/suggestion.
Did you rerun the driver when you put in the new card.If not try that.
phlunkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-03, 10:52 AM   #4
JayC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: London, UK
Posts: 5
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by phlunkie
A question/suggestion.
Did you rerun the driver when you put in the new card.If not try that.
Yes, I did reinstall the drivers (from source). I wanted to try the 4363 drivers to see if they worked any better (but just got a black screen), and ended up recompiling to put 4496 back on.

But thanks for the suggestion.
JayC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-03, 09:10 AM   #5
baerentzen
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 5
Unhappy more slow performance on fx 5900

I am experiencing a similar problem to the one that started this thread.

My performance on an FX 5900 is around
15 million triangles per second. I get around
45 million on a Quadro 4 900 XGL.

on the 5900 I get between 2000 and 3000
fps using glxgears.

This is using the NVIDIA 44.96 driver.

These numbers seem to be far too low, although there is no obvious problem -
except if the GPU speed reported below
is actually correct ... ?
---------
-- General info --
Card: nVidia GeforceFX 5900 Ultra
PCI id: 0x330
GPU speed: 250.714 MHz
Bustype: AGP

-- Memory info --
Amount: 256 MB
Type: 128 bit DDR
Speed: 501.428 MHz

-- AGP info --
Status: Enabled
Rate: 4X
AGP rates: 1X 2X 4X
Fast Writes: Enabled
SBA: Enabled
---------

Is there a general problem with FX5900
on linux?

/Andreas
__________________
jab "replace with at" imm.dtu.dk
baerentzen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-03, 10:36 AM   #6
JayC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: London, UK
Posts: 5
Default Re: more slow performance on fx 5900

Quote:
Originally posted by baerentzen
I am experiencing a similar problem to the one that started this thread.
Hi Andreas! I'm still having these problems too, so I'm afraid I can't help much yet.

But tomorrow, if all goes well, I should be upgrading to a P4 2.8GHz 800FSB with a Gigabyte GA-8KNXP dual DDR motherboard. This supports AGP 8x, so I'm going to see if the board performs better in 8x than it does in 4x. I'll also be installing Linux 2.6-test3 (after a brief test in 2.4) to see how well it runs, so (NVidia drivers permitting ) I can report on whether that helps improves performance or not.

(out of interest, which manufacturer makes your FX 5900 card? mine is a PNY card)
JayC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-03, 10:57 AM   #7
baerentzen
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 5
Default

Hello

My board is a winfast A350 Ultra TDH.

However, I do have a fix - I had simply forgotten to plug in the power supply.

shame on me!

On the other hand, I still get a performance
below what I would expect - about half
the triangles per second of a Radeon9800. I am not sure what is causing this.

But if the numbers reported by nvclock are correct - the board is running at
300 MHz and not 450 - this might explain
the issue.

However, the lack of power was the
main issue ...

Andreas
__________________
jab "replace with at" imm.dtu.dk
baerentzen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-03, 12:13 PM   #8
Anthaus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 197
Default

Guys, you're scaring me. I just got a GF FX 5900 but I haven't tested it yet. How about a Quake 3 benchmark? Just to get another point of comparison...
Edit:
I'll be using an Asus A7N8X MoBo.
__________________
Use the source, Tux.

Last edited by Anthaus; 08-15-03 at 12:17 PM.
Anthaus is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 08-15-03, 04:32 PM   #9
pandora808
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 3
Default

well, i've had a similar problem with the fx5200 128. I bought it and put it in, and it performed slightly better sometimes, and slightly worse other times compared to my geforce2 ti 64. Totally bummed. the benchmarks i'd seen for this card should have trampled my gf2. But oh well, so I'm taking the card back, no use it having this card in when my other card worked as good, and was more stable. the fx5200 crashed my box (opengl hang) about 2-3 times a week, the gf2 did maybe once every 3 months. maybe.

pandora
pandora808 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-03, 09:55 AM   #10
Moled
cheese
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 137
Default

Model: GeForce FX 5900 Ultra
IRQ: 16
Video BIOS: 04.35.20.22.00
Card Type: AGP



NVRM version: NVIDIA Linux x86 nvidia.o Kernel Module 1.0-4496 Wed Jul 16 19:03:09 PDT 2003


Status: Enabled
Driver: AGPGART
AGP Rate: 8x
Fast Writes: Enabled
SBA: Disabled


43721 frames in 5.0 seconds = 8744.200 FPS
43663 frames in 5.0 seconds = 8732.600 FPS
43727 frames in 5.0 seconds = 8745.400 FPS

desktop is at 1600x1200x32

model name : Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 3.00GHz
cpu MHz : 3014.566
cache size : 512 KB


fsaa etc is off
Moled is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-03, 09:59 AM   #11
DivotMaker
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 823
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by baerentzen

But if the numbers reported by nvclock are correct - the board is running at
300 MHz and not 450 - this might explain
the issue.

Andreas
Those are the 2D clock numbers. Try the 3D clock numbers and 450 should be the 3D clock number for the core.
DivotMaker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-03, 03:19 AM   #12
baerentzen
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 5
Default Thanks - it is getting better ...

Hello,

Thanks - a previous poster pointed out that
I was probably getting 2D clock speeds.
That is correct. If I run nvclock while a 3D program is also running I get speeds of
450 MHz exactly as expected.

I can get around 8000 fps out of glxgears.

[By the way: glxgears seems to be fill rate limited. This is probably the reason why it is faster when all the pixels in the window are hidden. You can also improve the performance of glxgears by changing the size of the window.]

However, my own test program reports too few polygons per second. Has someone tried comparing speeds under linux and windows?

/Andreas
__________________
jab "replace with at" imm.dtu.dk
baerentzen 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
Nvidia GeForce 301.42 WHQL drivers DSC NVIDIA Windows Graphics Drivers 5 05-29-12 10:12 PM
Enhance Max Payne 3, Diablo III with GeForce R300 Drivers News Latest Tech And Game Headlines 0 05-22-12 06:30 PM
New GPU from Nvidia Announced Today, the GeForce GTX 670 News Latest Tech And Game Headlines 0 05-10-12 01:50 PM
Gainward Unleashes the Sexy GeForce GTX 670 Phantom Graphics Card, Also launches the News Latest Tech And Game Headlines 0 05-10-12 09:28 AM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:07 PM.


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