No announcement yet.

Ubuntu Intel Performance Still In Bad Shape

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by ernstp View Post
    Well we come here anyway, don't we?! :-)
    He wrote, that he did not dislike all articles, did he?

    Same story for me, I skim the articles because sometimes there is something good to be found here.


    • #17
      I agree with most points jbrown96 mentioned. And I also agree with what chaos386 said: One IGP doesn't tell anything about the very different and widespread GM965/GM45 counterparts.

      Furthermore I'd like to give you an example of how to collapse your benchmark diagrams in the future:

      How come that the Phoronix Testsuite now features 100+ Tests, but you happen to post the most irrelevant ones? How exactly is a KDE user or even Gnome Firefox user affected by GTK rendering performance? Please give me an example of an application that is bottlenecked by GtkRadioButton rendering performance?

      I serioulsy encourage to review the published benchmarks in terms of practical relevance. If you lack discussions of driver internals, there's not much point in posting lowlevel benchmarks and I suggest skipping that. This extends to the meaningless test of RamSpeed in different kernel versions.

      To say something positive: I enjoyed the 32 vs. 64 Bit Linux articles once.


      • #18
        JBrown, what would like the article authors to write between the graphs? There's no great wisdom in those brief sentences, but there isn't any wild speculation about the cause of any discrepancies either. I'm thankful that my time isn't wasted by reading pages of bullcrap.

        The selection of tests causes much more concern for me. Rarely is an article posted where I'm not left wondering how a few other things perform.


        • #19
          I think KMS is the key here, Ubuntu needs to enable that. Let's see some new benchmarks then.
          KMS is easily enabled in karmic now, there's absolutely no performance difference between UMS and KMS in UXA for me though.


          • #20
            jbrown96, it would be more suitable for someone like you to switch to decaf. In the conclusion of your argument, I gathered that you can count pretty high without the aid of your hands and feet. Complaining about his verbose word choice or his graph descriptions isn't helping.

            Michael is making it painfully obvious that the performance regression on intel REALLY SUCKS. The more press this issue gets, possibly the more faster it will be resolved.

            Dicks like you are regressive to this fast nature of spreading word, stop posting long meaningless articles that are longer than your victim's.


            • #21
              Here's my results vs the ones in this news post using 2.7.1rc1 drivers because I think its fairer to compare exa vs exa and I dont see ubuntu moving to the UXA only 2.8 series drivers anytime soon with all of the problems it has.. Our hardware is basically the same, only I have 512mb ram more. Also I'm using mesa 7.5rc1 instead of 7.6 that we're tracking in xorg-edgers which has some major problems right now.


              as I mentioned in the "Testing latest -intel in Ubuntu" thread, I set up another PPA besides xorg-edgers with what I consider more stable packages that I used for that test because xorg-edgers is tracking the absolute latest bleeding edge stuff which of course is prone to breaking.. this is just temporary until things stabilize a little more though.


              edit: here's an updated one with KMS/UXA also.

              Last edited by Sarvatt; 05-09-2009, 10:26 AM.