Slow FX5600XT

[Ben]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

I've been using an MSI FX5600XT, 128MB for awhile now. I know that
glxgears isn't a good benchmark, but my card seems...slow in comparison to
others. Currently I get just under 1000fps in the default window size,
which sounds ridiculous because my old MX400 got about 600fps in the same
conditions. My buddy has an MX440 and gets around 2100fps. As far as I
know, the FX5600 should greatly outpower an MX440. Games seem to run
alright, but I would expect to get higher framerates than 40fps in
1280x1024 @ 16 bit (high quality textures), in original UT -- I got almost
that much with my MX400.

Maybe I'm missing something, but I've tried 4 different driver versions,
very similar fps on all of them. Direct rendering is on, and I'm using
nvidia's libglx.so. I don't know where to go from here and any help or
ideas would be appreciated.

 

[Ben]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

On Mon, 02 Aug 2004 03:35:45 +0000, Ben wrote:

Ack. Forgot to mention my specs.

nForce2 motherboard, 400MHz fsb.
AMD Athlon XP 2000+
256mb ddr ram

 

[augustus]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

"Ben" <xppc@better.than.your.wittydomain.com> wrote in message
newsan.2004.08.02.03.36.19.217670@better.than.your.wittydomain.com...
> I've been using an MSI FX5600XT, 128MB for awhile now. I know that
> glxgears isn't a good benchmark, but my card seems...slow in comparison to
> others.

You might get more answers on a Linux n/g

 

[Ben]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

On Mon, 02 Aug 2004 04:27:08 +0000, Augustus wrote:

>
> "Ben" <xppc@better.than.your.wittydomain.com> wrote in message
> newsan.2004.08.02.03.36.19.217670@better.than.your.wittydomain.com...
>> I've been using an MSI FX5600XT, 128MB for awhile now. I know that
>> glxgears isn't a good benchmark, but my card seems...slow in comparison
>> to others.
>
> You might get more answers on a Linux n/g

Heh, I just realized this wasn't one, thanks.

 

[jafar]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

On Mon, 02 Aug 2004 03:35:45 +0000, Ben wrote:

> I've been using an MSI FX5600XT, 128MB for awhile now. I know that
> glxgears isn't a good benchmark, but my card seems...slow in comparison to
> others. Currently I get just under 1000fps in the default window size,

The 5600 is not very good for starters. When it is handicapped even more
by the XT (ie slower clockspeed than a standard 5600) it is disappointing.
Even my aging Geforce2 MX gets 760fps on glx gears. From memory my
Geforce4 ti4200(rip) got around 3000fps.
Basically, it's time you upgraded to an FX5700 at least

btw, I also have an Athlon 2000+

--
Jafar Calley
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
d+ s-:+ a C++++ L++ E--- W++ N++ w-- PE- t* 5++ R+ !tv D+ G e* h---- x?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Registered Linux User #359623
http://fatcatftp.homelinux.org

 

[ozman]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

Sounds like what I've been trying to figure out also. I originally had a
MX440 8x and I wondered after the card was installed if I did increase my
speeds. Here is a website I found after I bought my FX5600xt.
http://users.erols.com/chare/video.htm 2 things I found out that didn't
make me happy was the memory speed and the memory bandwidth. The MX440 8x
is potentially faster. I then benchmarked it with Futuremark and with the
AA filters turned on the FX5600xt is much faster in games. I'm wondering if
there is a 2d benchmark I could do.

"Ben" <xppc@better.than.your.wittydomain.com> wrote in message
newsan.2004.08.02.03.36.19.217670@better.than.your.wittydomain.com...
> I've been using an MSI FX5600XT, 128MB for awhile now. I know that
> glxgears isn't a good benchmark, but my card seems...slow in comparison to
> others. Currently I get just under 1000fps in the default window size,
> which sounds ridiculous because my old MX400 got about 600fps in the same
> conditions. My buddy has an MX440 and gets around 2100fps. As far as I
> know, the FX5600 should greatly outpower an MX440. Games seem to run
> alright, but I would expect to get higher framerates than 40fps in
> 1280x1024 @ 16 bit (high quality textures), in original UT -- I got almost
> that much with my MX400.
>
> Maybe I'm missing something, but I've tried 4 different driver versions,
> very similar fps on all of them. Direct rendering is on, and I'm using
> nvidia's libglx.so. I don't know where to go from here and any help or
> ideas would be appreciated.