FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Gentoo > Gentoo User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 10-19-2010, 10:59 PM
Paul Hartman
 
Default Upgrading from FX-5200 to a GeForce 6200 512MB

On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
> Paul Hartman wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 2:45 AM, Dale<rdalek1967@gmail.com> *wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I am thinking of upgrading from a FX-5200 with 128Mb video card to a
>>> GeForce
>>> 6200 with 512MB. *It will be AGP since this is a older rig. *My system is
>>> something like this:
>>>
>>> Mobo: *Abit NF7 2.0
>>> CPU: AMD 2500+ *No overclocking
>>> Memory: *2Gbs of 333Mhz.
>>> Monitor: *Gateway 19" running 1280 x 1024
>>>
>>
>> Based on the selection at Newegg, I would highly recommend going with
>> one of the Radeon HD 3650 or 4650 cards which only cost a little more
>> than the one you're looking at. HD3650 is going to be 5x faster than
>> GeForce 6200 and HD4650 probably 10x faster.
>>
>> I think your motherboard supports AGP 8x, and I'm not sure if there
>> are any power supply considerations or other features (number of DVI
>> heads, etc) but anyway that's my 2 cents.
>>
>> I am an Nvidia video card guy through and through, but in this case
>> the AGP Nvidia cards on offer there are ancient and slow compared to
>> their ATI counterparts.
>>
>>
>
> I'm a nvidia guy. *I'm not big on ATI at all. *Just sort of not my cup of
> tea. *I have read they have better Linux support than a long time ago but
> they came in a little to late for me.
>
> I just wish that thing had a bigger heat sink on it with fans. *I may change
> that thing pretty quick.
>
> Thanks.

Okay then To return to your original question, I think going from
FX-5200 to Geforce 6200 should probably give you something like 15%
performance improvement. I don't think either card is new enough to be
supported by vdpau so there won't be anything gained there.

6200 uses the current drivers (260.xx) whereas the 5200 is on the
legacy drivers (173.xx), maybe there are additional 3D effects
supported by the newer chipset/drivers. There's a humongous matrix of
nvidia chipset and model numbers somewhere on the internet that
explains the differences but I can't seem to find it at the moment. My
Google-fu is failing me.
 
Old 10-19-2010, 11:34 PM
Adam Carter
 
Default Upgrading from FX-5200 to a GeForce 6200 512MB

There's a humongous matrix of

nvidia chipset and model numbers somewhere on the internet that

explains the differences but I can't seem to find it at the moment. My

Google-fu is failing me.


*
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_NVIDIA_graphics_processing_units
 
Old 10-19-2010, 11:40 PM
Dale
 
Default Upgrading from FX-5200 to a GeForce 6200 512MB

Paul Hartman wrote:

On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Dale<rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:


Paul Hartman wrote:


On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 2:45 AM, Dale<rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:



I am thinking of upgrading from a FX-5200 with 128Mb video card to a
GeForce
6200 with 512MB. It will be AGP since this is a older rig. My system is
something like this:

Mobo: Abit NF7 2.0
CPU: AMD 2500+ No overclocking
Memory: 2Gbs of 333Mhz.
Monitor: Gateway 19" running 1280 x 1024



Based on the selection at Newegg, I would highly recommend going with
one of the Radeon HD 3650 or 4650 cards which only cost a little more
than the one you're looking at. HD3650 is going to be 5x faster than
GeForce 6200 and HD4650 probably 10x faster.

I think your motherboard supports AGP 8x, and I'm not sure if there
are any power supply considerations or other features (number of DVI
heads, etc) but anyway that's my 2 cents.

I am an Nvidia video card guy through and through, but in this case
the AGP Nvidia cards on offer there are ancient and slow compared to
their ATI counterparts.




I'm a nvidia guy. I'm not big on ATI at all. Just sort of not my cup of
tea. I have read they have better Linux support than a long time ago but
they came in a little to late for me.

I just wish that thing had a bigger heat sink on it with fans. I may change
that thing pretty quick.

Thanks.


Okay then To return to your original question, I think going from
FX-5200 to Geforce 6200 should probably give you something like 15%
performance improvement. I don't think either card is new enough to be
supported by vdpau so there won't be anything gained there.

6200 uses the current drivers (260.xx) whereas the 5200 is on the
legacy drivers (173.xx), maybe there are additional 3D effects
supported by the newer chipset/drivers. There's a humongous matrix of
nvidia chipset and model numbers somewhere on the internet that
explains the differences but I can't seem to find it at the moment. My
Google-fu is failing me.





One thing I was hoping is that the newer drivers would work better. I
would think they only update what they have to for new kernels and
such. That is my hope. It does seem to get slower as time goes on but
I'm not sure how much that is the drivers and how much that is to do
with the new KDE4. I'm sure KDE4 has a good bit to do with it too.


That is about the fastest card I could find that was AGP tho. I may
look around and see what else I can find to tho.


Dale

:-) :-)
 
Old 10-20-2010, 12:11 AM
Dale
 
Default Upgrading from FX-5200 to a GeForce 6200 512MB

Adam Carter wrote:
There's a humongous matrix of


nvidia
chipset and model numbers somewhere on the internet that

explains the differences but I can't seem to find it at the moment. My

Google-fu is failing me.




*



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_NVIDIA_graphics_processing_units






Nice link.* I didn't even think of looking on that site.* I guess one
good thing to go by is the processing power and memory.* After all,
that's what makes it all work faster.* Looks like I'm still getting a
pretty old card but I don't play any hard core games or anything.*
Playing videos is about as much load as the card will see with me.* I
do play Kpatience tho.* Love my card games.*



Thanks.



Dale



:-)* :-)*
 
Old 10-20-2010, 12:14 AM
Dale
 
Default Upgrading from FX-5200 to a GeForce 6200 512MB

Florian Philipp wrote:

Am 19.10.2010 14:23, schrieb Dale:


Florian Philipp wrote:


Am 19.10.2010 09:45, schrieb Dale:



Hi,

I am thinking of upgrading from a FX-5200 with 128Mb video card to a
GeForce 6200 with 512MB. It will be AGP since this is a older rig. My
system is something like this:

Mobo: Abit NF7 2.0
CPU: AMD 2500+ No overclocking
Memory: 2Gbs of 333Mhz.
Monitor: Gateway 19" running 1280 x 1024

I think my memory is fine, it never uses all of it, or even half of it,
except for caching stuff. I may try to get a 3000+ or 3200+ CPU if I
can run up on a good deal. I'm thinking of doing the video card first
because it is cheaper. I have also noticed that playing movies on here
is getting a bit slow if I go full screen or close to full screen. I'm
bad to download from youtube and then play them locally full screen or
as close as it will allow.

I do use the nvidia drivers. Currently:

nvidia-drivers-173.14.25

I'm on that one because I think I need to upgrade my kernel to use the
latest one that was recently put in the tree. I'm looking at this card:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814133328

What kind of improvement can I expect from this video card upgrade?
While I am at it, the CPU upgrade won't make that much difference
right? Maybe 20% or so faster or something like that?




Hi Dale,

first and foremost, a newer card will allow you to use the newest driver
series (195.*.*) which is always a good thing

It also gives you more texture units. You can use these to transfer more
work to your GPU (mostly scaling and such). Take a look at `man mplayer`
section '-vo gl' for a list of options.
VLC has similar options, I think. I don't know about gstreamer or xine.

I could be wrong but I don't think that adobe-flash uses these options.
That is probably part of the problem why flash is so much slower on
GNU/Linux than on Windows. If my assumption is true, you are better off
buying a faster CPU.

You could also test how gnash performs. Since it uses ffmpeg (AFAIK) it
might be worth a try.

Please take my advices with a big dose of salt. While I still run an old
desktop with nearly identical specs, I almost never use Youtube and
therefore have no experience with that.

Hope this helps,
Florian Philipp




This particular card I think uses the latest 260.* drivers. That's
according to the nvidia site but sometimes that is not correct either.

Anyway, I always download the videos off youtube or where ever and then
watch them with smplayer locally. It generally works better for the
most part. I just have the slow DSL so it skips a bit on some if I
don't download it first. I do need a faster CPU but want to get the
card first. I do sometimes max out the CPU when watching a video but I
think most of the time it is the card that is just getting old and needs
a new one that is a little faster at least. For the price, I was going
to get a card that is a good bit faster.



[...]

Ah, in that case tweaking your mplayer config might really help. Look at
the man page for options (-vo gl:...).

You really have to try every option and sometimes reasonable
combinations. I've found that even if the man page says it is a slow
option, sometimes it's the fastest. As I've said before, you will reach
the maximum number of texture units in your card, therefore certain
options will not work together but the man page tells you how many
texture units each option needs. With that info it should be easy to
tweak your settings.

To get you going, try mplayer -vo gl:yuv=2:lscale=1:cscale=1<file>
Don't forget to test it in fullscreen mode.

You can later apply these options either in /etc/mplayer/mplayer.conf or
in ~/.mplayer/config like this: "vo=gl:yuv=2:lscale=1:cscale=1"

Hope this helps,
Florian Philipp




I'll look into that in a bit. Sort of having a so so day today. Those
options may help tho. I mostly play mp4's tho. They can be pretty big.


Dale

:-) :-)
 
Old 10-20-2010, 03:54 AM
Adam Carter
 
Default Upgrading from FX-5200 to a GeForce 6200 512MB

Nice link.* I didn't even think of looking on that site.* I guess one
good thing to go by is the processing power and memory.* After all,
that's what makes it all work faster.* Looks like I'm still getting a
pretty old card but I don't play any hard core games or anything.*
Playing videos is about as much load as the card will see with me.* I
do play Kpatience tho.* Love my card games.*



I would have thought you would have no problems at all with your current system. IIRC I had no problem with full screen SD video using mplayer on a Athlon 2200 with a crappy integrated 440MX video... what's the CPU utilization when you're playing the full screen video?


I'm just thinking changing the card might not make any difference.
 
Old 10-20-2010, 04:12 AM
Dale
 
Default Upgrading from FX-5200 to a GeForce 6200 512MB

Adam Carter wrote:




Nice link.* I didn't even
think of looking on that site.* I guess one
good thing to go by is the processing power and memory.* After all,
that's what makes it all work faster.* Looks like I'm still getting a
pretty old card but I don't play any hard core games or anything.*
Playing videos is about as much load as the card will see with me.* I
do play Kpatience tho.* Love my card games.*








I would have thought you would have no problems at all with your
current system. IIRC I had no problem with full screen SD video using
mplayer on a Athlon 2200 with a crappy integrated 440MX video... what's
the CPU utilization when you're playing the full screen video?



I'm just thinking changing the card might not make any difference.




The CPU is usually at about 40 or 50% or so.* Sometimes it goes higher
but I can usually watch a video while emerge is running as far as CPU
time goes, although emerge takes longer that way.*



I'm wondering if the card may be getting hot and slowing down because
of that?* i replaced the heat sink a good while back and I got more
than enough cooling on the case.* The heat sink has a fan and maybe it
is not turning or something.* I did blow out the dust a while back and
I do have filters over the intakes to help some.



Dale



:-)* :-)*
 
Old 10-20-2010, 10:03 AM
Florian Philipp
 
Default Upgrading from FX-5200 to a GeForce 6200 512MB

Am 20.10.2010 00:59, schrieb Paul Hartman:
[...]
>
> Okay then To return to your original question, I think going from
> FX-5200 to Geforce 6200 should probably give you something like 15%
> performance improvement. I don't think either card is new enough to be
> supported by vdpau so there won't be anything gained there.
>

As a side note:

I don't think there are any AGP cards out there that support GPGPU
capabilities like vdpau. And even if bridge chips exist which support
that, I wouldn't recommend it. The bus simply can't handle it. The
bandwidth and latency bottleneck is bad enough on PCIe x 16, already.

For vdpau, you'll need a Geforce 8-series card.

Regards,
Florian Philipp
 
Old 10-20-2010, 04:25 PM
Paul Hartman
 
Default Upgrading from FX-5200 to a GeForce 6200 512MB

On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 11:12 PM, Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm wondering if the card may be getting hot and slowing down because of
> that?* i replaced the heat sink a good while back and I got more than enough
> cooling on the case.* The heat sink has a fan and maybe it is not turning or
> something.* I did blow out the dust a while back and I do have filters over
> the intakes to help some.

Some Nvidia cards can go into a slow-motion mode when they overheat, I
had that happen on mine (it was a 6000 or 7000 series, I think) when
the fan died and I didn't realize it. The slowdown was dramatic in
those cases. It would usually happen if I was playing a game or a
video, suddenly it would go 2 frames per second. I'd stop the
game/video, and even things like opening a window were slow. After a
minute or two, everything would be back to normal speed. Eventually I
learned that the card was protecting itself by switching to an
ultra-slow mode to try to fight the overheating.

nvidia-settings may be able to show you the temperature and speeds on
your card. You might need to add:

Option "coolbits" "1"

to the device section in your xorg.conf to get it to show you some of
those options if they aren't initially visible.
 
Old 10-20-2010, 06:25 PM
Dale
 
Default Upgrading from FX-5200 to a GeForce 6200 512MB

Paul Hartman wrote:

On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 11:12 PM, Dale<rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:


I'm wondering if the card may be getting hot and slowing down because of
that? i replaced the heat sink a good while back and I got more than enough
cooling on the case. The heat sink has a fan and maybe it is not turning or
something. I did blow out the dust a while back and I do have filters over
the intakes to help some.


Some Nvidia cards can go into a slow-motion mode when they overheat, I
had that happen on mine (it was a 6000 or 7000 series, I think) when
the fan died and I didn't realize it. The slowdown was dramatic in
those cases. It would usually happen if I was playing a game or a
video, suddenly it would go 2 frames per second. I'd stop the
game/video, and even things like opening a window were slow. After a
minute or two, everything would be back to normal speed. Eventually I
learned that the card was protecting itself by switching to an
ultra-slow mode to try to fight the overheating.

nvidia-settings may be able to show you the temperature and speeds on
your card. You might need to add:

Option "coolbits" "1"

to the device section in your xorg.conf to get it to show you some of
those options if they aren't initially visible.




I appear to have another issue to deal with right now. This is weird.
When I type in any nvclock command, I get something like this:


root@smoker / # nvclock -i
*** buffer overflow detected ***: nvclock terminated
======= Backtrace: =========
/lib/libc.so.6(__fortify_fail+0x50)[0xb75af850]
/lib/libc.so.6(+0xe18aa)[0xb75ad8aa]
/lib/libc.so.6(+0xe0f78)[0xb75acf78]
/lib/libc.so.6(__overflow+0x4a)[0xb753670a]
/lib/libc.so.6(_IO_vfprintf+0x50b9)[0xb750db39]
/lib/libc.so.6(__vsprintf_chk+0xa7)[0xb75ad027]
/lib/libc.so.6(__sprintf_chk+0x2d)[0xb75acf6d]
nvclock[0x8057317]
[0x30322e34]
======= Memory map: ========
08048000-08060000 r-xp 00000000 08:16 311032 /usr/bin/nvclock
08060000-08061000 r--p 00017000 08:16 311032 /usr/bin/nvclock
08061000-08062000 rw-p 00018000 08:16 311032 /usr/bin/nvclock
09369000-0938a000 rw-p 00000000 00:00 0 [heap]
b731f000-b733b000 r-xp 00000000 08:16 2070143
/usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.4.3/libgcc_s.so.1
b733b000-b733c000 r--p 0001b000 08:16 2070143
/usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.4.3/libgcc_s.so.1
b733c000-b733d000 rw-p 0001c000 08:16 2070143
/usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.4.3/libgcc_s.so.1

b7360000-b7370000 rw-s dc300000 00:0d 8375 /dev/nvidia0
b7370000-b7470000 rw-s dc700000 00:0d 8375 /dev/nvidia0
b7470000-b74a0000 rw-s dc000000 00:0d 8375 /dev/nvidia0
b74a0000-b74a1000 rw-p 00000000 00:00 0
b74a1000-b74a5000 r-xp 00000000 08:16 242258 /usr/lib/libXdmcp.so.6.0.0
b74a5000-b74a6000 r--p 00003000 08:16 242258 /usr/lib/libXdmcp.so.6.0.0
b74a6000-b74a7000 rw-p 00004000 08:16 242258 /usr/lib/libXdmcp.so.6.0.0
b74a7000-b74a9000 r-xp 00000000 08:16 179499 /usr/lib/libXau.so.6.0.0
b74a9000-b74aa000 r--p 00001000 08:16 179499 /usr/lib/libXau.so.6.0.0
b74aa000-b74ab000 rw-p 00002000 08:16 179499 /usr/lib/libXau.so.6.0.0
b74ab000-b74ac000 rw-p 00000000 00:00 0
b74ac000-b74ae000 r-xp 00000000 08:16 3019384 /lib/libdl-2.11.2.so
b74ae000-b74af000 r--p 00001000 08:16 3019384 /lib/libdl-2.11.2.so
b74af000-b74b0000 rw-p 00002000 08:16 3019384 /lib/libdl-2.11.2.so
b74b0000-b74ca000 r-xp 00000000 08:16 2178229 /usr/lib/libxcb.so.1.1.0
b74ca000-b74cb000 r--p 00019000 08:16 2178229 /usr/lib/libxcb.so.1.1.0
b74cb000-b74cc000 rw-p 0001a000 08:16 2178229 /usr/lib/libxcb.so.1.1.0
b74cc000-b760c000 r-xp 00000000 08:16 3018521 /lib/libc-2.11.2.so
b760c000-b760e000 r--p 0013f000 08:16 3018521 /lib/libc-2.11.2.so
b760e000-b760f000 rw-p 00141000 08:16 3018521 /lib/libc-2.11.2.so
b760f000-b7612000 rw-p 00000000 00:00 0
b7612000-b7620000 r-xp 00000000 08:16 623393 /usr/lib/libXext.so.6.4.0
b7620000-b7621000 r--p 0000d000 08:16 623393 /usr/lib/libXext.so.6.4.0
b7621000-b7622000 rw-p 0000e000 08:16 623393 /usr/lib/libXext.so.6.4.0
b7622000-b773e000 r-xp 00000000 08:16 2143515 /usr/lib/libX11.so.6.3.0
b773e000-b773f000 r--p 0011b000 08:16 2143515 /usr/lib/libX11.so.6.3.0
b773f000-b7742000 rw-p 0011c000 08:16 2143515 /usr/lib/libX11.so.6.3.0
b774f000-b7751000 rw-s dc680000 00:0d 8375 /dev/nvidia0
b7751000-b7761000 rw-s dc610000 00:0d 8375 /dev/nvidia0
b7761000-b7763000 rw-s dc601000 00:0d 8375 /dev/nvidia0
b7763000-b7764000 rw-s dc100000 00:0d 8375 /dev/nvidia0
b7764000-b7765000 rw-s dc101000 00:0d 8375 /dev/nvidia0
b7765000-b7766000 rw-p 00000000 00:00 0
b7766000-b7767000 r-xp 00000000 00:00 0 [vdso]
b7767000-b7783000 r-xp 00000000 08:16 3019734 /lib/ld-2.11.2.so
b7783000-b7784000 r--p 0001b000 08:16 3019734 /lib/ld-2.11.2.so
b7784000-b7785000 rw-p 0001c000 08:16 3019734 /lib/ld-2.11.2.so
bfe28000-bfe49000 rw-p 00000000 00:00 0 [stack]
Aborted
root@smoker / #


I guess I'll have to take the side off the case and use the infrared
thingy and look to see if the fan is turning. I'm not sure what is
going on with the buffer overflow error tho.


Dale

:-) :-)
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 12:18 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org