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

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-12-04, 10:42 PM   #1
tudorv
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 9
Default GeForce FX5600 glxgears benchmark

I'm curious what kind of FPS people get in glxgears with this card (or similar)? I get ~2500 FPS (1152x864, 24-bit, default glxgears window size), but I wonder if this is the optimum or there's something I do wrong?

Thanks!
tudorv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-04, 01:11 AM   #2
mrblobby
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 7
Default

Hi there,

I get ~2400 fps with my Albatron FX5600EQ 128MB, but
am running 1600x1200x24-bit desk, so that may slow it a
little bit...

Kind regards, Chris W, New Zealand.
mrblobby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-04, 12:53 AM   #3
msch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 16
Default xfx 5600

hey, i'm only getting 1800 or so.
i'm running 1024x768, 1024x768 with twinview.
msch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-04, 02:30 AM   #4
mrblobby
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 7
Default Re: xfx 5600

Quote:
Originally posted by msch
hey, i'm only getting 1800 or so.
i'm running 1024x768, 1024x768 with twinview.
Twinview probably wont help that! :-)

I redid glxgears after closing netscape after posting my original reply, and I've
gone from 2400 to 2600 fps...Netscape is a greedy RAM/CPU hog! :-)

Kind regards,

Chris W, New Zealand.
mrblobby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-04, 11:15 AM   #5
sybourg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Yorkshire, England
Posts: 5
Default

Those are interesting figures, running at 1152x864 on my system I get around 2400-2500fps, at 1024x768 with back end processes turned off I get around 2700fps, thats in 32 bit colour. I'm running an Athlon 2000XP with 768mb mem and an 'old' ELSA Geforce 920 graphics card (basically a Geforce 3).
sybourg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-04, 11:32 AM   #6
sybourg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Yorkshire, England
Posts: 5
Default

In fact, just logged in as root, set to 1152x864, 24bit (32 bit in above message was a typo) and re-run glxgears and got the following:

[root@sol001 root]# glxgears
11133 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2226.600 FPS
13710 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2742.000 FPS
13719 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2743.800 FPS
13715 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2743.000 FPS
[root@sol001 root]#



Dunno where the FX5600 is position in relation to the old Ge-Force 3, what other settings are you guys running ? Aliasing etc ? I've got everything on driver defaults as installed. Perhaps its more that GLX doesnt push the cards to their limits so they are hitting a plateau of performance.
sybourg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-04, 05:31 PM   #7
Gregor976
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Orlando
Posts: 183
Default

Just for reference..

GF4 4200 275/550
Barton @ 2Ghz
1GB 400mhz DDR

Kernel:
2.4.22-10mdk

NV driver 5328
1152x864x24

[lgregl@DR-EVIL lgregl]$ glxgears
18364 frames in 5.0 seconds = 3672.800 FPS
18569 frames in 5.0 seconds = 3713.800 FPS
18395 frames in 5.0 seconds = 3679.000 FPS
18625 frames in 5.0 seconds = 3725.000 FPS
18709 frames in 5.0 seconds = 3741.800 FPS
18304 frames in 5.0 seconds = 3660.800 FPS
18532 frames in 5.0 seconds = 3706.400 FPS
18228 frames in 5.0 seconds = 3645.600 FPS
X connection to :0.0 broken (explicit kill or server shutdown).
[lgregl@DR-EVIL lgregl]$

Incidently.. How do you stop glxgears without getting the x connection broken msg?
It seems pretty much cpu/memory limited.


Gregor
Gregor976 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-04, 05:47 AM   #8
pzgren
Registered User
 
pzgren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 107
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Gregor976
Just for reference..

[lgregl@DR-EVIL lgregl]$ glxgears
18364 frames in 5.0 seconds = 3672.800 FPS
18569 frames in 5.0 seconds = 3713.800 FPS
18395 frames in 5.0 seconds = 3679.000 FPS
18625 frames in 5.0 seconds = 3725.000 FPS
18709 frames in 5.0 seconds = 3741.800 FPS
18304 frames in 5.0 seconds = 3660.800 FPS
18532 frames in 5.0 seconds = 3706.400 FPS
18228 frames in 5.0 seconds = 3645.600 FPS
X connection to :0.0 broken (explicit kill or server shutdown).
[lgregl@DR-EVIL lgregl]$

Incidently.. How do you stop glxgears without getting the x connection broken msg?
It seems pretty much cpu/memory limited.
Gregor
With the upper left key named "Esc"? ;-)

But very slow. I get in the past with my old MSI GF4Ti4200 - 1.0-4496 Barton2800,
kernel 2.6:

[marcus@redtuxi marcus]$ glxgears
30844 frames in 5.0 seconds = 6168.800 FPS
31193 frames in 5.0 seconds = 6238.600 FPS
31192 frames in 5.0 seconds = 6238.400 FPS

with anisoptric filtering on! And now with a ASUS FX 5700 around ~4500fps
53.xx driver with an open firefox and nautilus file browser...

Maybe its the slow MDK XFree86/KDE? Fedora and Gentoo are a little faster, in my experiences...

Marcus
pzgren is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 02-15-04, 06:24 AM   #9
Thunderbird
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Netherlands, Europe
Posts: 2,105
Default

Really don't look at all these glxgears scores. Glxgears is not a good benchmark. It mainly draws some polygons to the screen. The results depend on lots of things (driver, cpu(!, yes a very fast gpu can create good scores too), videocard, kernel, resolution, depth ..). If you lets say get 3000 points and someone else gets 6000 points that won't say that ut2004 will run twice as fast on his box. Compare timedemo results of real games and not glxgears scores.
Thunderbird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-04, 07:09 AM   #10
pzgren
Registered User
 
pzgren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 107
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Thunderbird
Really don't look at all these glxgears scores. Glxgears is not a good benchmark. It mainly draws some polygons to the screen. The results depend on lots of things (driver, cpu(!, yes a very fast gpu can create good scores too), videocard, kernel, resolution, depth ..). If you lets say get 3000 points and someone else gets 6000 points that won't say that ut2004 will run twice as fast on his box. Compare timedemo results of real games and not glxgears scores.
...and timedemo (with individual settings) results are not depending on: driver, cpu, gpu, kernel, color depth,... ;-) You have answered yourself... Yes, glxgears is very basic and not quite good for this.

And the performance is under Linux never the same if: A MDK user with overbloaded creaping KDE 3.x +22 kde-applets sucking the CPU/MEM and 33 daemons sleeping in the bg to suck more. When I came with a pure clean Fedora TWM desktop.

A better thing as bad timedemos and glxgears, because the Unreal engine depends most on the CPU, Q3/ET/Wolfenstein on the GPU maybe... a better way was this spec:

---> http://www.specbench.org/gpc/opc.sta...rf711info.html

Then we can perhaps make a nice and fair database here, with given attitudes and software and we do not have these threads in future?


Marcus
pzgren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-04, 07:23 AM   #11
james
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Okinawa
Posts: 3
Default

To all who have posted their benchmarks, thanks, it confirms my suspicions that I am getting really bad framerates for glxgears from my FX5600. I had to replace a Ti4200 that went bad ( which used to get ~ 3600 fps without AGP enabled ), but my new 5600 only ever gets 500-580 fps! I've tried almost everythink I can think of or that I have seen on this board, but still no luck. I have used the 2.6.0, 2.6.1 , and 2.6.2 kernels with the 4620 and now 5336 drivers.

Here is a sample of glxgears:
poster@sirius:~> glxgears
2609 frames in 5.0 seconds = 521.800 FPS
2883 frames in 5.0 seconds = 576.600 FPS
2870 frames in 5.0 seconds = 574.000 FPS
2853 frames in 5.0 seconds = 570.600 FPS
2844 frames in 5.0 seconds = 568.800 FPS
2861 frames in 5.0 seconds = 572.200 FPS
2845 frames in 5.0 seconds = 569.000 FPS


Ouch!!

Well, I guess I'll just keep trying to tweak things, this can't be the best my card can do.
james is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-04, 08:51 AM   #12
sybourg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Yorkshire, England
Posts: 5
Default

That really looks like its running in software mode - i.e. no hardware acceleration.

There is an nvidia utility somewhere which you can use to tell you what settings your card is running with - cant remember what it is and the machine I'm on at the moment doesnt have an nvidia card in it. Try searching the forums I'm sure I found it in there somewhere.

I've had problems before and found that completely uninstalling the graphics driver and reverting back to a 'normal' setup i.e. software mode, doing a full reboot and then running through the install process again can solve a few things. Make sure you uninstall the MesaGL(??) driver but not the MesaGL library (search the forums) as that can **** things up as well - I've seen linux default to running the software MesaGL driver instead of the nv driver when both are installed.

The machine I'm on at the mo, 1Ghz, ATI Rage 128 and software mode gets around 270fps.
sybourg 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
What You Can Expect From GeForce GRID News Archived News Items 0 06-04-12 05:20 PM
Nvidia GeForce 301.42 WHQL drivers DSC NVIDIA Windows Graphics Drivers 5 05-29-12 11:12 PM
Enhance Max Payne 3, Diablo III with GeForce R300 Drivers News Archived News Items 0 05-22-12 07:30 PM
New GPU from Nvidia Announced Today, the GeForce GTX 670 News Archived News Items 0 05-10-12 02:50 PM
Gainward Unleashes the Sexy GeForce GTX 670 Phantom Graphics Card, Also launches the News Archived News Items 0 05-10-12 10:28 AM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:18 AM.


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