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

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 09-08-04, 05:12 PM   #1
rbroman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 4
Default FX5200/2.6/6111 Slowwww

My system is GigaByte Mobo with VIA KT800 chipset, Athlon64 3200+, NVidia FX5200, RHEL WS U3, Kernel 2.6.8.1, NVIDIA-Linux-x86-1.0-6111 driver. Running all 32-bit, even tho it's a 64-bit CPU. 3D Graphics performance is slowwww - like 74 frames in 5.0 seconds = 14.800 FPS on glxgears. Also unstable - glxgears will sometimes start
faster, then slow down - oddly, glxgears sometimes speeds up if I put another window
over the gears display.

Kernel compiled with CONFIG_AGP=y, CONFIG_AGP_AMD64=y, CONFIG_AGP_VIA=y. NVIDIA-Linux-x86-1.0-6111-pkg1.run compiled an nvidia.ko module, which loads without error. XF86Config file specifies Load "glx" and Driver "nvidia".

Some log data below .... I can obviously provide more if needed .... would appreciate any thoughts as to a solution

Thx, Randy

# cat /proc/driver/nvidia/agp/status shows the following
Status: Enabled
Driver: AGPGART
AGP Rate: 8x
Fast Writes: Disabled
SBA: Enabled

# cat /var/log/XFree86.0.log (PARTIAL output)
(II) LoadModule: "nvidia"
(II) Loading /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/drivers/nvidia_drv.o
(II) Module nvidia: vendor="NVIDIA Corporation"
compiled for 4.0.2, module version = 1.0.6111
Module class: XFree86 Video Driver

(II) LoadModule: "glx"
(II) Loading /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/extensions/libglx.so
(II) Module glx: vendor="NVIDIA Corporation"
compiled for 4.0.2, module version = 1.0.6111
Module class: XFree86 Server Extension
ABI class: XFree86 Server Extension, version 0.1
(II) Loading extension GLX

(II) NVIDIA(0): NVIDIA GPU detected as: GeForce FX 5200
(--) NVIDIA(0): VideoBIOS: 04.34.20.27.00
(--) NVIDIA(0): Interlaced video modes are supported on this GPU
(II) NVIDIA(0): Detected AGP rate: 8X
(--) NVIDIA(0): VideoRAM: 131072 kBytes

(II) NVIDIA(0): Setting mode "1024x768"
(II) Loading extension NV-GLX
(II) NVIDIA(0): NVIDIA 3D Acceleration Architecture Initialized
(II) NVIDIA(0): Using the NVIDIA 2D acceleration architecture
(==) NVIDIA(0): Backing store disabled
(==) NVIDIA(0): Silken mouse enabled
(**) Option "dpms"
(**) NVIDIA(0): DPMS enabled
(II) Loading extension NV-CONTROL
(==) RandR enabled
rbroman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-04, 06:12 PM   #2
rbroman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 4
Default Re: FX5200/2.6/6111 Slowwww

Further to my own post .... I applied this patch

http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/atta...achmentid=7676

Doesn't seem to help. glxgears results are below - the curious thing is that the *slower*
FPS are with the glxgears window on top and the *faster* FPS are by (patially) covering the glxgears display with a terminal window .... the printout below is sequential/unedited
and shows the speed change as the termin al window is moved around:

3135 frames in 5.0 seconds = 627.000 FPS
3791 frames in 5.0 seconds = 758.200 FPS
3792 frames in 5.0 seconds = 758.400 FPS
3778 frames in 5.0 seconds = 755.600 FPS
4409 frames in 5.0 seconds = 881.800 FPS
6350 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1270.000 FPS
6349 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1269.800 FPS
6355 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1271.000 FPS
6353 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1270.600 FPS
6349 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1269.800 FPS
5815 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1163.000 FPS
3780 frames in 5.0 seconds = 756.000 FPS
3837 frames in 5.0 seconds = 767.400 FPS
3838 frames in 5.0 seconds = 767.600 FPS
3841 frames in 5.0 seconds = 768.200 FPS
4016 frames in 5.0 seconds = 803.200 FPS
5892 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1178.400 FPS
5898 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1179.600 FPS
5896 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1179.200 FPS
5864 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1172.800 FPS
rbroman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-04, 12:45 PM   #3
surfed
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 7
Default Re: FX5200/2.6/6111 Slowwww

those last results are correct for an 5200....its a slow card...
and of course your frames go up when you cover the gears as the gpu does not have to draw that much....
surfed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-04, 05:04 AM   #4
Spyke
Foxie
 
Spyke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 618
Send a message via AIM to Spyke Send a message via MSN to Spyke Send a message via Yahoo to Spyke
Default Re: FX5200/2.6/6111 Slowwww

Hardly correct, the speeds on drivers prior to 6106 are considerably much faster on the MX 5200. (I say MX since thats the cards proper name if you ask me)

Last edited by Spyke; 09-11-04 at 02:03 PM.
Spyke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-04, 03:24 AM   #5
gabuzo
Registered User
 
gabuzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 15
Unhappy Re: FX5200/2.6/6111 Slowwww

Quote:
Originally Posted by surfed
those last results are correct for an 5200....its a slow card...
and of course your frames go up when you cover the gears as the gpu does not have to draw that much....
I do understand that the FX5200 is a slow card however when I switched from a GF4 MX 440 to a FX5200 I notice a real slow down with glxgears: 1500-1600 fps with the MX440 vs less than 500 fps on the FX5200.
gabuzo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-04, 03:56 AM   #6
anmsg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2
Default Re: FX5200/2.6/6111 Slowwww

I face the same problem too. Although mine card is PCX5300 where I guess, the basic chip is the same as FX5200 albeit mine is a PCIx card while your's I guess, is an AGP card.

I have MX4000 as well as MMX440 card and they really work good but the new PCX5300 card is quite slow. I get 800FPS speed as opposed to the 1700FPS speed that I get with MX4000 card that is supposedly inferior to this.

The problem is only with the OpenGL since all X applications run faster than mine MX4000 card. I tried Redhat 9, Fedora 2 but all with same results. Needless to say that I have latest 6111 drivers from Nvidia.

One Very Important point though. I have the Intel chip with HT technology. When I switch off Hyperthreading (HT) in the BIOS, I get performance of 800FPS while switching it on reduces the speed to 600FPS. So, that is one issue. Check out if you face the same. Although I am still at a very poor speed as compared to about 1500-2000FPS that I get or you should get.
anmsg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-04, 03:59 AM   #7
Cartman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 52
Default Re: FX5200/2.6/6111 Slowwww

With 61.06 drivers I was getting up to 1500 fps on my FX5200. While with 61.11 I get max 1080 fps.
Cartman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-04, 06:33 PM   #8
energyman76b
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Clausthal/Germany
Posts: 1,104
Default Re: FX5200/2.6/6111 Slowwww

*sigh*
glxgears does not bench the cards, it is only good for seeing of glx works or not.
energyman76b is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 09-23-04, 12:28 AM   #9
gabuzo
Registered User
 
gabuzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 15
Default Re: FX5200/2.6/6111 Slowwww

Quote:
Originally Posted by energyman76b
*sigh*
glxgears does not bench the cards, it is only good for seeing of glx works or not.
Read this, however, speaking for myself, isn't getting from 1500 fps to less then 500 fps by only switching the video card (440MX to FX5200) a not to bad indicator that something is not working correctly?
gabuzo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-04, 05:55 AM   #10
anmsg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2
Default Re: FX5200/2.6/6111 Slowwww

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cartman
With 61.06 drivers I was getting up to 1500 fps on my FX5200. While with 61.11 I get max 1080 fps.
Thanks Cartman! I did the same and observed 20% increase in fps.

So, here was I my progress:
- From Redhat 9 to Fedora Core 2: Speed up from 400fps to 600fps
- Switching off Hyperthreading in BIOS: Speed up from 600fps to 800fps
- Switching back to 61.06 driver from 61.11 driver: Speed up from 800fps to 1050 fps

Still, it is far from satisfactory. I should get about 2000 fps. I suspect something is still wrong in my system.

CPU: P4, 2.8Ghz, 915G chipset with HT
OS: Fedora Core 2 with new 2.6.8.1 kernel (although I believe the new kernel hasn't done anything significantly different)
Card: Nvidia PCX5300

I was told that the basic chip technology is same in this as in FX5200 except the slot, hence I posted my views on this thread. Please pardom me if that's wrong to do..
anmsg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-04, 08:46 AM   #11
Cartman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 52
Default Re: FX5200/2.6/6111 Slowwww

Quote:
Originally Posted by anmsg
Thanks Cartman! I did the same and observed 20% increase in fps.

So, here was I my progress:
- From Redhat 9 to Fedora Core 2: Speed up from 400fps to 600fps
- Switching off Hyperthreading in BIOS: Speed up from 600fps to 800fps
- Switching back to 61.06 driver from 61.11 driver: Speed up from 800fps to 1050 fps

Still, it is far from satisfactory. I should get about 2000 fps. I suspect something is still wrong in my system.
I don't think its a problem with your system my guess is NVidia screwed something badly in 61.11 for FX5200 chipsets . Also try running in 16bit depth it improves perfomance too.
Cartman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-24-04, 03:49 AM   #12
gabuzo
Registered User
 
gabuzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 15
Lightbulb Some benchs

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cartman
I don't think its a problem with your system my guess is NVidia screwed something badly in 61.11 for FX5200 chipsets . Also try running in 16bit depth it improves perfomance too.
I try to downgrade from 61.11 to 53.36 and perform some benchmarks one with glx-I'm-not-a-benchmark-gears and one with ut2004demo.

On 61.11 I got 462 fps with glxgears and the following output from ut2004:
Code:
UT2004 Build UT2004_Build_[2004-02-10_03.01]
x86 Linux
GenuineIntel Unknown processor @ 2254 MHz
GeForce FX 5200/AGP/SSE2

dm-rankin?spectatoronly=true?numbots=12?quickstart=true?attractcam=true -benchmark -seconds=80 -ini=Default.ini -exec=../Benchmark/Stuff/timedemo.txt

12.788100 / 36.753006 / 110.723045 fps         rand[461742711]
Score = 36.734478
Downgrading both the nvidia module & nvidia glx to 53.36, I got 562 fps with glx gears and the following result from ut2004:


Code:
UT2004 Build UT2004_Build_[2004-02-10_03.01]
x86 Linux
GenuineIntel Unknown processor @ 2254 MHz
GeForce FX 5200/AGP/SSE2

dm-rankin?spectatoronly=true?numbots=12?quickstart=true?attractcam=true -benchmark -seconds=80 -ini=Default.ini -exec=../Benchmark/Stuff/timedemo.txt

3.459466 / 35.606304 / 110.139717 fps         rand[461742711]
Score = 35.589161
That's not much of a difference so may be the FX5200 frame rate problem are not cause by the driver alone.
__________________
Avatar by the GruikMaster
gabuzo 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


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:44 AM.


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