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 10-20-2010, 07:07 PM
Paul Hartman
 
Default Upgrading from FX-5200 to a GeForce 6200 512MB

On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 1:25 PM, Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
> 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

Seems like maybe that is glibc stopping you from running a program
with a (potential) buffer overflow. You can set an environment
variable to make it stop doing that and let you run the program
anyway, assuming you don't want to edit nvclock's source code to fix
the problem.

Try:

MALLOC_CHECK_=0 nvclock -i

("man malloc" for more info)
 
Old 10-20-2010, 07:28 PM
Dale
 
Default Upgrading from FX-5200 to a GeForce 6200 512MB

Paul Hartman wrote:

MALLOC_CHECK_=0 nvclock -i


It appears that it is more serious than that setting can overcome. Same
error as before. I'm running glibc-2.11.2. Anyone having a similar
issue with that version?


Try to fix one thing and find something else broke. lol

Dale

:-) :-)
 
Old 10-25-2010, 11:42 PM
Dale
 
Default Upgrading from FX-5200 to a GeForce 6200 512MB

Dale wrote:

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?


Thoughts? Opinions?

Thanks.

Dale

:-) :-)



OK. I been thinking on this. I decided to run glxgears to see what
sort of frame rates I get. I used to get about 30 or so. I know this
isn't the best test in the world but I should get something to compare
to at least. This is what I get:


16 frames in 5.1 seconds = 3.148 FPS
16 frames in 5.1 seconds = 3.165 FPS
15 frames in 5.3 seconds = 2.811 FPS
16 frames in 5.2 seconds = 3.075 FPS
16 frames in 5.1 seconds = 3.130 FPS
16 frames in 5.1 seconds = 3.159 FPS
16 frames in 5.1 seconds = 3.167 FPS
16 frames in 5.1 seconds = 3.154 FPS


So, same card as a year or so ago and same everything else but now I get
only about 1/10th the frame rate. What gives? Is this a driver issue?
I'm going to take the side off and blow out the case in a bit and test
again. I'm open to ideas in the meantime tho. I may not need a
upgrade, I may just need to fix what I got.


Dale

:-) :-)
 
Old 10-26-2010, 12:08 AM
Alex Schuster
 
Default Upgrading from FX-5200 to a GeForce 6200 512MB

Dale writes:

> So, same card as a year or so ago and same everything else but now I
> get only about 1/10th the frame rate. What gives? Is this a driver
> issue?

Is OpenGL working at all? Does glxinfo produce lots of output, with
'direct rendering: Yes' near the top? If not, your're using software
rendering, all is done by the CPU, not the GPU.

Wonko
 
Old 10-26-2010, 01:48 AM
Dale
 
Default Upgrading from FX-5200 to a GeForce 6200 512MB

Alex Schuster wrote:

Dale writes:



So, same card as a year or so ago and same everything else but now I
get only about 1/10th the frame rate. What gives? Is this a driver
issue?


Is OpenGL working at all? Does glxinfo produce lots of output, with
'direct rendering: Yes' near the top? If not, your're using software
rendering, all is done by the CPU, not the GPU.

Wonko



That's what I am thinking. I notice here lately that my CPU is being
used a LOT more then it used to when playing videos or something. I
recently changed kernels and nvidia drivers, the kernel upgrade forced
me to upgrade nvidia. It appears to have gotten worse with each
upgrade. This is what I got from these two commands:


root@smoker / # eselect opengl list
Available OpenGL implementations:
[1] nvidia *
[2] xorg-x11


root@smoker / # glxinfo
name of display: :0.0
display: :0 screen: 0
direct rendering: Yes
server glx vendor string: NVIDIA Corporation
server glx version string: 1.4
server glx extensions:
GLX_EXT_visual_info, GLX_EXT_visual_rating, GLX_SGIX_fbconfig,
GLX_SGIX_pbuffer, GLX_SGI_video_sync, GLX_SGI_swap_control,
GLX_EXT_texture_from_pixmap, GLX_ARB_multisample, GLX_NV_float_buffer
client glx vendor string: NVIDIA Corporation
client glx version string: 1.4
client glx extensions:
GLX_ARB_get_proc_address, GLX_ARB_multisample, GLX_EXT_visual_info,
GLX_EXT_visual_rating, GLX_EXT_import_context, GLX_SGI_video_sync,
GLX_NV_swap_group, GLX_NV_video_out, GLX_SGIX_fbconfig,
GLX_SGIX_pbuffer,

GLX_SGI_swap_control, GLX_NV_float_buffer, GLX_ARB_fbconfig_float,
GLX_EXT_fbconfig_packed_float, GLX_EXT_texture_from_pixmap,
GLX_EXT_framebuffer_sRGB, GLX_NV_present_video
GLX version: 1.3
GLX extensions:
GLX_EXT_visual_info, GLX_EXT_visual_rating, GLX_SGIX_fbconfig,
GLX_SGIX_pbuffer, GLX_SGI_video_sync, GLX_SGI_swap_control,
GLX_EXT_texture_from_pixmap, GLX_ARB_multisample, GLX_NV_float_buffer,
GLX_ARB_get_proc_address
OpenGL vendor string: NVIDIA Corporation
OpenGL renderer string: GeForce FX 5200/AGP/SSE/3DNOW!
OpenGL version string: 2.1.2 NVIDIA 173.14.25
OpenGL shading language version string: 1.20 NVIDIA via Cg compiler

<<SNIPPED??

It says direct rendering is working but it sure doesn't act like it. I
watched a video a bit ago and although it was a small thing, only took
about 20% of my screen, it used just about all the CPU power. It didn't
do that a few months or so ago. It used to take only 25% or so to do a
full screen video. This is really weird.


I did take the side off my case a hour or so ago. I took my air tank
and blew it out pretty good. I also checked to make sure the fan was
turning on the video card chip. It was spinning fine and I could feel a
little bit of air. It's a small fan so I wasn't expecting a tornado or
anything. Anyway, after blowing it out AND generating a xorg-conf with
nvidia's program, I get this:


root@smoker / # glxgears
Running synchronized to the vertical refresh. The framerate should be
approximately the same as the monitor refresh rate.
2932 frames in 5.0 seconds = 586.390 FPS
1260 frames in 5.7 seconds = 222.873 FPS
2 frames in 7.6 seconds = 0.263 FPS
2 frames in 8.0 seconds = 0.249 FPS
2 frames in 7.6 seconds = 0.264 FPS
2 frames in 7.7 seconds = 0.259 FPS
XIO: fatal IO error 22 (Invalid argument) on X server ":0.0"
after 58 requests (58 known processed) with 0 events remaining.
root@smoker / #

Well, if it wasn't bad enough before, it is really bad now. The first
couple were when the window was really small. I adjusted it to full
screen which is where the 0.2 FPS comes in. That used to be about 30 or
so a while back.


This is with the nvidia generated xorg.conf file. I'm going back to my
hand made one. It seems to be a little better.


Any ideas as to why everything says it is working but it isn't?

Dale

:-) :-)
 
Old 10-26-2010, 02:04 AM
Iain Buchanan
 
Default Upgrading from FX-5200 to a GeForce 6200 512MB

On Mon, 2010-10-25 at 18:42 -0500, Dale wrote:

> So, same card as a year or so ago and same everything else but now I get
> only about 1/10th the frame rate. What gives? Is this a driver issue?
> I'm going to take the side off and blow out the case in a bit and test
> again. I'm open to ideas in the meantime tho. I may not need a
> upgrade, I may just need to fix what I got.
>
> Dale
>
> :-) :-)
>

I'm having issues with the latest mix of nvidia-drivers, xorg, and
whatever else it might be!

I'm getting bad performance when switching virtual dekstops and moving
windows and such. GL screensavers seem to be ok though.

Someone posted recently about an upgrade that affected him (looking...
can't find it). He downgraded to fix it, but it wasn't nvidia or x from
memory. Sorry for being vague, I'll keep looking.

--
Iain Buchanan <iaindb at netspace dot net dot au>

When an episode of Walker Texas Ranger was aired in France, the French surrendered to Chuck Norris just to be on the safe side.
 
Old 10-26-2010, 02:26 AM
Dale
 
Default Upgrading from FX-5200 to a GeForce 6200 512MB

Iain Buchanan wrote:

On Mon, 2010-10-25 at 18:42 -0500, Dale wrote:



So, same card as a year or so ago and same everything else but now I get
only about 1/10th the frame rate. What gives? Is this a driver issue?
I'm going to take the side off and blow out the case in a bit and test
again. I'm open to ideas in the meantime tho. I may not need a
upgrade, I may just need to fix what I got.

Dale

:-) :-)



I'm having issues with the latest mix of nvidia-drivers, xorg, and
whatever else it might be!

I'm getting bad performance when switching virtual dekstops and moving
windows and such. GL screensavers seem to be ok though.

Someone posted recently about an upgrade that affected him (looking...
can't find it). He downgraded to fix it, but it wasn't nvidia or x from
memory. Sorry for being vague, I'll keep looking.




Well, at least we know there is a problem and it isn't just us. If you
find something, let us know. I would hate to know I had to try to
watch a DVD right now. I doubt it would even start up. o_O


BTW, hal is disabled on xorg here. It's enabled on other things but not
xorg.


Dale

:-) :-)
 
Old 10-26-2010, 03:55 AM
Dale
 
Default Upgrading from FX-5200 to a GeForce 6200 512MB

Dale wrote:


Well, at least we know there is a problem and it isn't just us. If
you find something, let us know. I would hate to know I had to try
to watch a DVD right now. I doubt it would even start up. o_O


BTW, hal is disabled on xorg here. It's enabled on other things but
not xorg.


Dale

:-) :-)



I have a update. Check this out:

root@smoker / # glxgears
Running synchronized to the vertical refresh. The framerate should be
approximately the same as the monitor refresh rate.
1380 frames in 5.0 seconds = 275.147 FPS
242 frames in 5.0 seconds = 48.345 FPS
241 frames in 5.0 seconds = 48.191 FPS
246 frames in 5.0 seconds = 49.056 FPS
240 frames in 5.0 seconds = 47.902 FPS
238 frames in 5.0 seconds = 47.453 FPS
238 frames in 5.0 seconds = 47.566 FPS
240 frames in 5.0 seconds = 47.839 FPS
244 frames in 5.0 seconds = 48.577 FPS
242 frames in 5.0 seconds = 48.257 FPS
241 frames in 5.0 seconds = 48.196 FPS
242 frames in 5.0 seconds = 48.380 FPS
238 frames in 5.0 seconds = 47.573 FPS
238 frames in 5.0 seconds = 47.596 FPS
241 frames in 5.0 seconds = 48.168 FPS
XIO: fatal IO error 22 (Invalid argument) on X server ":0.0"
after 900 requests (900 known processed) with 0 events remaining.
root@smoker / #


What did I do you ask? Well, I did this:

root@smoker / # eselect opengl list
Available OpenGL implementations:
[1] nvidia *
[2] xorg-x11
root@smoker / # eselect opengl set 1
Switching to nvidia OpenGL interface... done
root@smoker / #

Yea, it SAID it was already set but I told it to set it again anyway.
Now I get some good frame rates again. Excuse me while I go watch some
videos I been wanting to watch but got tired of the spit and sputter. lol


YEPPIE ! ! ! It breathes again.

Dale

:-) :-)

P. S. Bonus points if someone can explain why that worked. o_O
 
Old 10-26-2010, 05:18 AM
me
 
Default Upgrading from FX-5200 to a GeForce 6200 512MB

On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 11:55 PM, Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dale wrote:
>>
>> Well, at least we know there is a problem and it isn't just us. * If you
>> find something, let us know. * I would hate to know I had to try to watch a
>> DVD right now. *I doubt it would even start up. *o_O
>>
>> BTW, hal is disabled on xorg here. *It's enabled on other things but not
>> xorg.
>>
>> Dale
>>
>> :-) *:-)
>>
>
> I have a update. *Check this out:
>
> root@smoker / # glxgears
> Running synchronized to the vertical refresh. *The framerate should be
> approximately the same as the monitor refresh rate.
> 1380 frames in 5.0 seconds = 275.147 FPS
> 242 frames in 5.0 seconds = 48.345 FPS
> 241 frames in 5.0 seconds = 48.191 FPS
> 246 frames in 5.0 seconds = 49.056 FPS
> 240 frames in 5.0 seconds = 47.902 FPS
> 238 frames in 5.0 seconds = 47.453 FPS
> 238 frames in 5.0 seconds = 47.566 FPS
> 240 frames in 5.0 seconds = 47.839 FPS
> 244 frames in 5.0 seconds = 48.577 FPS
> 242 frames in 5.0 seconds = 48.257 FPS
> 241 frames in 5.0 seconds = 48.196 FPS
> 242 frames in 5.0 seconds = 48.380 FPS
> 238 frames in 5.0 seconds = 47.573 FPS
> 238 frames in 5.0 seconds = 47.596 FPS
> 241 frames in 5.0 seconds = 48.168 FPS
> XIO: *fatal IO error 22 (Invalid argument) on X server ":0.0"
> * * *after 900 requests (900 known processed) with 0 events remaining.
> root@smoker / #
>
>
> What did I do you ask? *Well, I did this:
>
> root@smoker / # eselect opengl list
> Available OpenGL implementations:
> *[1] * nvidia *
> *[2] * xorg-x11
> root@smoker / # eselect opengl set 1
> Switching to nvidia OpenGL interface... done
> root@smoker / #
>
> Yea, it SAID it was already set but I told it to set it again anyway. *Now I
> get some good frame rates again. *Excuse me while I go watch some videos I
> been wanting to watch but got tired of the spit and sputter. *lol
>
> YEPPIE ! ! ! * It breathes again.
>
> Dale
>
> :-) *:-)
>
> P. S. *Bonus points if someone can explain why that worked. *o_O

It's been a while since I last had X + accelerated 3D on any of my
systems here (my gaming box's running W7), but it would be my guess
that, while Nvidia's libraries *were* configured as the GL
implementation to be used, in the process of the last driver upgrade
they got overwritten with upgraded versions, running things that
should have referenced them failed and defaulted to mesa's libraries,
and you got stuck with CPU based 3D rendering. Upon using eselect to
set it to Nvidia's again, however, you refreshed the links to the
proper, updated, libraries and things started using the GPU again.

This is, of course, entirely a guess, and is at least moderately
broken by this from glxinfo:

server glx vendor string: NVIDIA Corporation

Still... it's the best guess I have at 1:17 AM here, my time.

--
Poison [BLX]
Joshua M. Murphy
 
Old 10-26-2010, 05:27 AM
Iain Buchanan
 
Default Upgrading from FX-5200 to a GeForce 6200 512MB

On Mon, 2010-10-25 at 22:55 -0500, Dale wrote:
> I have a update. Check this out:

hey, don't get my hopes up like that. Still no improvement on my box.
But then, I am seeing nearly 6500 FPS ....

--
Iain Buchanan <iaindb at netspace dot net dot au>

The chief enemy of creativity is "good" sense
-- Picasso
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 03:32 AM.

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