Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

X1950XTX FPS Issues

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
December 20, 2006 4:52:46 AM

Ok, guys I've been working on this problem all day today and I'm no closer to fixing it so I thought I'd register here and ask....

I bought a new ATI X1950XTX 512MB GDDR4 PCI-E this morning to replace my ATI X800XL 256MB GDDR3 PCI-E and I've been having some serious issues, I'm not getting any better FPS with the new card than I am with the old one. 28 with the old and 21 - 25 with the new.

My current specs.
AMD Athlon X64 4400+ 2.2GHz X2 Socket 939 2MB L2
Abit KN8-SLI NForce4 SLI
2GB PC3200 DDR
Creative Soundblaster Audigy 4 PCI sound card
Seagate 250GB SATA 7200RPM 8MB
ATI Radeon X1950XTX 512MB GDDR4 PCI-Express X16
Dell 2005FPW 20 inch widescreen at 1680 x 1050
Windows XP Pro SP2 with all the latest drivers

I've tried everything I can think of and I'm still not getting any better FPS than with my old card. The game I play is Microsoft Flight Simulator 2004 and with the exact same settings my old card is out performing my new one. I really don't know what to do and any help would be fantastic. Thanks a lot !

More about : x1950xtx fps issues

December 20, 2006 12:01:15 PM

Dunno if the game has different rendering paths (SM 2.0 vs 3.0) - but if it does, then running SM 3.0 on the 1950 as opposed to 2.0 on the 800 means that you get more eye candy for slight perf hit.

If this is not so, then the resolution on your monitor might be the problem. On the demo I played of this game, FPS was bad already, and I was on 1280x1024 with Core 2 E6600, 2gig DDR2 and X1900XTX.

At your res, I doubt if FPS will be great though. You might also want to check that all post processing (Anisotropic Filtering and Anti Antializing - porbably got the spelling wrong) is disabled.

Other than that, I'm as useless as drunk on the 1st of Jan.
December 20, 2006 2:58:36 PM

Well I don't expect to see 100+ FPS but it should at the very least beat my old card..... The weird thing is that when I turn the settings down ( AA, AF ) the FPS DECREASES !!!! I think it might have something to do with the card not running at it's full power. I read the topic about the X1950XTX's not reaching 2000MHz on these fourms and I think I might have the problem were the card isn't accelerating back to full power when I run a game. I think it's staying in power save mode...... Anyone know what I can do ?
Related resources
December 20, 2006 4:14:59 PM

I don't know - the demo was already very dodgy in terms of changing settings in the game itself, so I wouldn't worry too much.

The people whom complain of their 1950's not reaching 2ghz, wants to measure it in desktop mode by looking at Catalyst Control Center - and they'll look at it for a long time.

The only way to see that your card bumps up, is to use a graph app that records historic data (1 hour approx) or to connect a second monitor and dragging the catalyst control center into second view.

Trust me, you will go to 2ghz if the game requires it.

Also keep in mind that flight sims are traditionally system hogs - Lock On even today, after 3 generations of gcards still can't run with everything maxed out and not have an instance of bad performance.

Also, there will always be a game that will be more powerfull than hardware can manage, so you will most likely have to toggle settings in game and get some compromise - even me being a hard headed person had to succumb to this sad fact of life. :wink:
December 20, 2006 4:58:21 PM

My old card could run FS pretty well and with the same settings this new card is getting 10 FPS less than what I was getting with the old card.
If I reduce the settings performance instead of increasing, decreases.....
Is it possible to override the card and disable the power save feature so that it runs at max all the time ?
December 20, 2006 9:15:10 PM

I tried what you suggested and turned antisotropic filtering from 16x to 2x and my FPS decreased from 25 to 20. I called ATI today and they don't know what it is either. When FS is running I look the CCC and it's showing the card running at 506MHz GPU and 594MHz Memory speed. I'm so confused and could really use some expert advice.......

Using the same settings here are my FPS, old card vs new.

X800XL - 28
X1950XTX - 20
December 20, 2006 10:14:35 PM

Tough call bro.
Even with the new card u SHOULD be getting more FPS regardless of any possible throttling.
Ive got the 1950XT and i know its not fully supported yet.
All i can suggest is try using diff ver drivers. There is also an app that will fully remove old drivers.
Try 6.10, 6.11, and 6.12.

Did ati say they were aware of this card/game being an issue? Or were they like "oh it should be fine"?

How do other games run?

If other games are fine, it would be a driver issue. Older versions for one reason or other can sometimes work better for some games :?

Failing that i 'hear' 6.13 is 'supposed' to sort out all the 1950 issues.

Hope this helps.

PS: did u try the ati knowledge base?
December 20, 2006 10:22:29 PM

X1950XTX have 3 modes : 2D, 2D accelerated and 3D, so it's absolutely normal your video card in idle mode runs gpu at 506 Mhz and memory at 594 Mhz... This is for energy saving (and extended lifespan components... ;) 

What drivers Catalyst version do you use ? Is your PCI-E graphic bus configured in x16 wide lane ? Is it the primary PCI-E slot (if SLI capability) ? What are PEG link capabilities (if any) ? (slow, Normal, Fast....) ? Is there any SLI mode activated in BIOS ? Is your PSU (at least) 20 A nominal capable on your(s) 12 V rail ? 12 V power amp is somewhat a Big issue, I can testify... Have you tried other very performance demanding games ? (F.E.A.R., Prey, Oblivion....) Is this only an issue with FS 2004 ?

Could you plug and check your ATI card into some 965P based chipset motherboard ? (Asus P965 ou 975, MSI P965 or Gigabyte....) ? I wonder whether if any possible compatibility issue between nVidia chipset and Radeon X1950 series could arise...

My system specs are Asus P5B Dlx + X1950XTX + 2xGo DDR800 + E6600 and the Radeon goes really fast, at least 30 - 35 % faster than my previous nVidia 7900 GT overclocked at 590 Mhz with incredible superior video quality !

By the way, don't expect your new radeon 1950XTX running 200% faster than your previous X800XL... except in commercial shows...
December 20, 2006 10:36:15 PM

Just thinking of it : have you tried to uninstall your previous Catalyst drivers and cleaned up everything with progs like DC3 ? Then just re-install your new 3D card.... Mixing different Catalyst versions could mess up things...

One other thing to test : install into a different HD partition a minimum spare Windows to test your card (with chipset drivers updated, Directx 9.0c updated ....)

Hope that could help you....
December 21, 2006 4:37:58 AM

Get ATi Tray Tools from Guru3d.

There's a monitoring section, and there you can check mem and core frequencies on a graph. Catalyst Control Center needs alt tabbing out of a game, or running a game windowed to check the frequecnies, and on both occasions I can guarantee you that the frequencies will be at 2d level.

As far as the x800 running faster than the x1950 goes:

X800 = SM2.0 / DX9.0b
X1950 = SM3.0 / DX9.0c

SM3.0 does not necessarily create bigger fps, but might use shorter code for similar functions in SM2.0 - this in most cases goes to better performance, but an ill game engine might turn that the other way.

Also, the X1950 is a much more comlicated design than the X800 - the 1xxx range is based on lesser, but fatter pipeline architecture, and in shader intensive games it will be a killer.

In the FS game, check if there is a shader detail / renderer (I don't know the whole setting section - will have a look 2nite on the demo) setting, and if you have a 3 choice section, medium should force SM2.0 (I'm assuming the game uses SM3.0 at this stage).

Also, do not use AA and AF in game aswell as in CCC. If the game supports this, use the game for these settings. Ensure that in CCC HQAF and Adaptive AA is OFF - these settings can kill many a game, especially the HQAF section running with a high AF multiplier.

Other than that, I can't be much more of assistance.
December 21, 2006 4:02:43 PM

Quote:
What drivers Catalyst version do you use ? Is your PCI-E graphic bus configured in x16 wide lane ? Is it the primary PCI-E slot (if SLI capability) ? What are PEG link capabilities (if any) ? (slow, Normal, Fast....) ? Is there any SLI mode activated in BIOS ? Is your PSU (at least) 20 A nominal capable on your(s) 12 V rail ? 12 V power amp is somewhat a Big issue, I can testify... Have you tried other very performance demanding games ? (F.E.A.R., Prey, Oblivion....) Is this only an issue with FS 2004 ?

6.12
How do I check this ?
Yes I think so.
What is PEG link ?
I don't think so.
My PSU is the Ultra X-Connect 550 Watt.
The only other game I play is Halo and it's not getting any better FPS than my other card either.
I don't think it's an FS 2004 only issue.

Quote:
In the FS game, check if there is a shader detail / renderer (I don't know the whole setting section - will have a look 2nite on the demo) setting, and if you have a 3 choice section, medium should force SM2.0 (I'm assuming the game uses SM3.0 at this stage).

Also, do not use AA and AF in game aswell as in CCC. If the game supports this, use the game for these settings. Ensure that in CCC HQAF and Adaptive AA is OFF - these settings can kill many a game, especially the HQAF section running with a high AF multiplier.

Other than that, I can't be much more of assistance.

Nothing like that. Remember that this is FS2004 not FSX. So if you download the demo make sure it's not FSX.

AA and AF are off and I get the EXACT same same FPS that I do when they are at their max....
HQAF and AAA are off and when I turn them on it doesn't hit the FPS at all.
If I reduce the settings the FPS stays the same ( Even with ATI Tray Tools FPS counter. ) and if I increase them it also stays the same.....

I'm just about ready to give up and send it back for a refund.....
December 21, 2006 5:49:45 PM

I got a chance to compare my new video card to another machine today...

AMD Athlon X64 3500+ 2.2GHz Socket 939 512KB L2
Abit AX8 VIA K8T890
1GB PC3200 DDR
Seagate 80GB IDE 7200RPM 8MB
ATI Radeon X800XL 256MB GDDR3 PCI-Express X16
Dell 2005FPW 20 inch widescreen at 1680 x 1050
Windows XP Pro SP2 with CCC version 6.11

Against my

AMD Athlon X64 4400+ 2.2GHz X2 Socket 939 2MB L2
Abit KN8-SLI NForce4 SLI
2GB PC3200 DDR
Creative Soundblaster Audigy 4 PCI sound card
Seagate 250GB SATA 7200RPM 8MB
ATI Radeon X1950XTX 512MB GDDR4 PCI-Express X16
Dell 2005FPW 20 inch widescreen at 1680 x 1050
Windows XP Pro SP2 with CCC version 6.11

With all the same settings machine 1 was getting 100 FPS in Halo while my machine was getting 70..... Something is very wrong if machine 1 is beating my own....
December 21, 2006 7:41:24 PM

Ok, guys forget it. I'm sending it back for a refund...
This has been a disaster.
December 21, 2006 7:56:24 PM

Quote:
even though you know it to be your machine and not the card :?

It's not my machine.... My computer was working great until I let myself get tempted into the 1950XTX...... I'm going back to my X800XL and my 28 FPS.
December 21, 2006 9:47:52 PM

There's nothing wrong with your X1900XTX, the problem is raw CPU horsepower. Flight Simulator is heavily CPU bound, so you're going to need all you can get. My former rig was an Opteron 170 OC'd to 3.0Ghz for Flight Simulator, and I upgraded to my current rig, because the Opty still wasn't enough horsepower for FS. With the C2D at 3.7Ghz, FS04 never drops below mid 40's FPS on max settings.

I run both FS04 and FSX. Differences in high end GPU horsepower has little impact on FPS. The following links have information you'll need to tweak FS, so you can get the most out of your rig.

http://www.fs2004.com/

http://flyawaysimulation.com/forum24.html

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTIxOCwx...

I ran FPS tests on my system at 2.4Ghz (stock clock) and 3.7Ghz. Results showed that FPS scaled 48.6% while CPU scaled 54.2%. This indicates that FSX is 89.7% CPU bound on my rig's configuration, with an X1900XT OC'd to 700 / 1.7. FS04 follows very similar CPU bindings.

Hope this helps. Enjoy! :D 
December 22, 2006 3:59:39 AM

Oh my soul : I thought this was FSX - my bad!

Where's my damn reading glasses?
December 22, 2006 11:54:31 AM

Quote:
Also keep in mind that flight sims are traditionally system hogs - Lock On even today, after 3 generations of gcards still can't run with everything maxed out and not have an instance of bad performance.


You were very close to clearly defining the problem. When you said "flight sims are traditionally system hogs" it's actually CPU hogs.

Quote:
Oh my soul : I thought this was FSX - my bad!

Where's my damn reading glasses?


Don't feel bad, because FSX is very nearly as CPU bound as FS04.

When I upgraded from an XP 2500 OC'd to 2.4Ghz, to an X2 3800 OC'd to 2.7Ghz, FPS increased. Then I upgraded from an X850XT OC'd to 580/1230, to my current X1900XT OC'd to 700/1700, FPS didn't change! Next I upgraded from the X2 3800 to an Opteron 170 OC'd to 3.0Ghz, and FPS increased. Lastly I upgraded from the Opteron to my current C2D rig OC'd to 3.7Ghz, and my FPS increased immensly, from 52 to 84 in FS04, which is 61.5%! As you can see, Flight Simulators are heavily CPU bound, so GPU horsepower has little effect.

I hope this helps to clarify these issues. :D 
!