Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A 13 Line Patch That Boosts Intel Sandy Bridge Performance

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Could Phoronix run this with the S3TC module perhaps and see if that boosts performance further any?

    Comment


    • #17
      Oops, I seem to have killed the thread.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by BenderRodriguez View Post
        There is some truth in what you are saying. That's why i bought an ATI video card instead of nVidia. Even though i miss some things i would have with closed nVidia drivers i decided i should vote with my wallet for the company that supports FOSS. I hope they are reading this

        So what you are saying is at least true in my case
        If AMD/ATI would shift further and actually allow you pay of that foss development as they do with windows drivers, yes.
        But currently its not the case.

        FOSS drivers have their shelf and its designated to be lower than their proprietary drivers. So if you want performance out of your card(why you actually buy the card) it does not matter which brand you pick.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
          If AMD/ATI would shift further and actually allow you pay of that foss development as they do with windows drivers, yes.
          But currently its not the case.

          FOSS drivers have their shelf and its designated to be lower than their proprietary drivers. So if you want performance out of your card(why you actually buy the card) it does not matter which brand you pick.
          I can't agree with you here. Have you seen gallium benchmarks? I am using gentoo and gallium drivers and besides being in the kernel i get very decent performance and stability! I can play any game i can with closed drivers without the headache. I should make some benchmarks to be sure but my performance isn't horribly lower than with proprietary drivers

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by BenderRodriguez View Post
            I can't agree with you here. Have you seen gallium benchmarks? I am using gentoo and gallium drivers and besides being in the kernel i get very decent performance and stability! I can play any game i can with closed drivers without the headache. I should make some benchmarks to be sure but my performance isn't horribly lower than with proprietary drivers
            Yes, the performance is within acceptable range - about 40% or less compared to the 100% that card "could have achieved", depending on task. The feature matrix incl. 3D support is also around 30-40%. I never had stability issues or headache when I had nvidia, btw - the only thing that distracted me was that it was proprietary and I'm more ATI fan. After searching for exact R700 chip 4670 (although there were unsupported evergreens already) I discovered opensource driver was not working at all and fglrx crashed my desktop hardly. This is why I sold the card and used 9800GT. Then, after more and more improvements were announced I risked again at took 4770 - and it worked. But the progress was slow and ..I mentioned the feature/performance already. So after I discovered that the reason for the whole fallback is ONLY due to absence of manpower I offered to employ some form of registering program on AMD site without any success. People just yell its falling back, but refuse to think or change it. Then I had become an answer that proprietary driver will for ever exist and opensource is destined to be a sub-product I've given up, to me it does not make sense, I refuse to support a policy where opensource is handled like shareware(try and buy) model. This isn't opensource, it is still proprietary model. There are still many many things to be done, but current formula is not something meaning business.
            Even if Intel has overall weak gfx possibilites on chip, their current efforts allow to squeeze almost the maximum out of it. And again, it was not proposed as GFX processor, its mainly CPU; and there is still progress.

            Comment


            • #21
              I think I post disclaimer. I share my thoughts here and I do not troll or have intention. I think it may appear that a person who has an idea is actually a troll - Einstein was possibly seen as troll by those who trusted Newtonian physics. Nor I claim I'm Einstein. Nor I want to "hijack" this thread. **end of disclaimer

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
                I think I post disclaimer. I share my thoughts here and I do not troll or have intention. I think it may appear that a person who has an idea is actually a troll - Einstein was possibly seen as troll by those who trusted Newtonian physics. Nor I claim I'm Einstein. Nor I want to "hijack" this thread. **end of disclaimer
                LOL - I'm not claiming I'm Einstein, but hey, there are a lot of similarities.

                I think the difference is that Einstein actually backed up what he said with math and experimental proof. Rather than just giving lots of unsubstantiated opinions about what others are thinking or planning to do, which can't ever be proven because they are opinions.

                Comment


                • #23
                  now if Intel where to improve their drivers for the previous generation of i5 GPUs to Windows standards I'd be happy.

                  Or at least to GMA 915 standards and by that I mean pushing the performance even close to what the hardware is actually capable of.
                  My old laptop with a Celeron M 1.3GHz and GMA 915 could do most 720p content but the CPU was too slow for 1080p. On my new laptop with an i5-450M and GMA HD I still can't do 1080p even with VA-API which leaves me kind of puzzled.
                  On top of that SB can now reach close to Windows performance by simply increasing the thread count?

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by zhucelun789 View Post
                    now if Intel where to improve their drivers for the previous generation of i5 GPUs to Windows standards I'd be happy.

                    Or at least to GMA 915 standards and by that I mean pushing the performance even close to what the hardware is actually capable of.
                    My old laptop with a Celeron M 1.3GHz and GMA 915 could do most 720p content but the CPU was too slow for 1080p. On my new laptop with an i5-450M and GMA HD I still can't do 1080p even with VA-API which leaves me kind of puzzled.
                    On top of that SB can now reach close to Windows performance by simply increasing the thread count?
                    Forgot the quote tags there, eh?

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by zhucelun789 View Post
                      On my new laptop with an i5-450M and GMA HD I still can't do 1080p even with VA-API which leaves me kind of puzzled.
                      use ffmpeg multi-threaded , a i5-450M can decode *perfectly* a 1080p video using its 2 cores.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Jimbo View Post
                        use ffmpeg multi-threaded , a i5-450M can decode *perfectly* a 1080p video using its 2 cores.
                        That's great but my old laptop was single core and still faster at 1080p, to the point where most content was actually watchable and some even without framedrop.
                        For now I'll just use the switchable HD 5650 for 1080p, but I expect large improvements in the future.

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X