1. Computers
  2. Display Drivers
  3. Graphics Cards
  4. Memory
  5. Motherboards
  6. Processors
  7. Software
  8. Storage
  9. Operating Systems


Facebook RSS Twitter Twitter Google Plus


Phoronix Test Suite

OpenBenchmarking.org

ECS NVIDIA GeForce GT 240 512MB

Michael Larabel

Published on 22 January 2010
Written by Michael Larabel
Page 3 of 9 - 23 Comments

The ECS GeForce GT 240 was installed into a system running an Intel Core i7 920 processor clocked to 3.60GHz, used an ASRock X58 SuperComputer motherboard, had 3GB of DDR3 system memory, and ran with a 320GB Seagate ST3320620AS SATA HDD. On the software side was Ubuntu 9.10 (x86_64) with the Linux 2.6.31 kernel, X Server 1.6.4, and the NVIDIA 195.30 beta display driver was installed.

The GeForce GT 240 booted up just fine with the binary NVIDIA graphics driver and had properly mode-set to 2560 x 1600. The PCI ID for this graphics card was 0x0ca3 while the PCI vendor ID is of course 0x10de. Compiz was working and OpenGL applications were running just fine. PowerMizer also had no problems dynamically changing the performance levels based upon load, but when we tried using CoolBits to overclock the GPU was the first signs of a problem. When attempting to change the 3D clock frequencies manually or using the auto detect feature, the clocks would not change from 550MHz for the CPU and 1700MHz for the GDDR5 memory. Attempting to apply any other core/memory clock values would not take. We could not overclock (or underclock) this ECS GeForce GT 240 graphics card under Linux and all attempts to do so had failed. This is either a bug within NVIDIA's binary Linux driver, an issue with the video BIOS on this ECS graphics card, or some combination thereof.

Due to this overclocking issue and another set of problems to be mentioned in this article, the ECS GeForce GT 240 graphics card was then installed in an entirely different AMD-based system and it was running with the NVIDIA 190.53 stable Linux driver rather than the 195 series beta. With this driver, CoolBits claimed to work and the optimal 3D clocks that it found was 720MHz for the graphics processor and 2040MHz for the memory. These optimal clocks are rather high and equates to the GPU running 30% faster and the memory running 20% above its rated speed. These values seemed to apply fine, but once carrying out the testing following this, there was no difference in the performance compared to its stock speeds. When polling the NV-CONTROL extension to see what the clocks were reading, they were back at their stock frequencies.

Latest Linux Hardware Reviews
  1. MSI X99S SLI PLUS On Linux
  2. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 Offers Great Linux Performance
  3. CompuLab Intense-PC2: An Excellent, Fanless, Mini PC Powered By Intel's i7 Haswell
  4. From The Atom 330 To Haswell ULT: Intel Linux Performance Benchmarks
Latest Linux Articles
  1. Open-Source Radeon 2D Performance Is Better With Ubuntu 14.10
  2. RunAbove: A POWER8 Compute Cloud With Offerings Up To 176 Threads
  3. 6-Way Ubuntu 14.10 Linux Desktop Benchmarks
  4. Ubuntu 14.10 XMir System Compositor Benchmarks
Latest Linux News
  1. Dead Island GOTY Now Available On Linux/SteamOS
  2. Ubuntu 14.04 In The Power8 Cloud From RunAbove
  3. KDE With Theoretical Client-Side Decorations, Windows 10 Influence
  4. Sandusky Lee: Great Cabinets For Storing All Your Computer Gear
  5. Fedora 21 Beta & Final Release Slip Further
  6. Mesa 10.3.2 Has A Couple Bug-Fixes
  7. RadeonSI/R600g HyperZ Support Gets Turned Back On
  8. openSUSE Factory & Tumbleweed Are Merging
  9. More Fedora Delays: Fedora 21 Beta Slips
  10. Mono Brings C# To The Unreal Engine 4
Latest Forum Discussions
  1. Updated and Optimized Ubuntu Free Graphics Drivers
  2. HOPE: The Ease Of Python With The Speed Of C++
  3. Use Ubuntu MATE 14.10 Make it an official distro.
  4. Users/Developers Threatening Fork Of Debian GNU/Linux
  5. Debian Is Back To Discussing Init Systems, Freedom of Choice
  6. AMD Radeon VDPAU Video Performance With Gallium3D
  7. Ubuntu 16.04 Might Be The Distribution's Last 32-Bit Release
  8. Linux hacker compares Solaris kernel code: