Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

radeonhd r6xx-7xx EXA performance patch

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

  • #11
    How's that possible?

    Comment


    • #12
      Originally posted by Obscene_CNN View Post
      try changing the number of test rounds gtkperf does from 100 to 1000. Your CPU is quite a bit faster than mine so I would expect less of an improvement. (I have only a 2GHz laptop with a radeonhd 3100)
      Code:
      Test rounds: 1000  Test All
      
      Driver:                           Total time:
      --------------------------------------------------------
      radeon   (latest git)             108.77
      radeonhd (latest git + patch)     109.14
      Most of the time however is spend in GtkTextView - Add text (54 seconds) and the more test rounds the slower the widget becomes.

      x11perf probably is a better way to benchmark graphics performance, but I don't have several hours to spare

      Comment


      • #13
        Originally posted by RealNC View Post
        How's that possible?
        x11perf runs a benchmark for a set period of time and counts the number of times an operation is performed.

        Comment


        • #14
          Originally posted by monraaf View Post
          Code:
          Test rounds: 1000  Test All
          
          Driver:                           Total time:
          --------------------------------------------------------
          radeon   (latest git)             108.77
          radeonhd (latest git + patch)     109.14
          Most of the time however is spend in GtkTextView - Add text (54 seconds) and the more test rounds the slower the widget becomes.

          x11perf probably is a better way to benchmark graphics performance, but I don't have several hours to spare
          I don't particularly like gtkperf. I can underclock my 2GHz CPU to 500MHz and get 20% better scrolling times in it.

          Strange... thanks for testing my patch and sharing the results though.

          Comment


          • #15
            radeonhd+patch 100x gtkperf 6.47
            radeonhd+patch 1000x gtkperf 102.10

            tormods latest git radeonhd 100x gtkperf 7.04
            tormods latest git radeonhd 1000x gtkperf 111.something

            I was a little excited and forgot to save the results before installing and resstarting X

            I can re-run with tormods during the weekend.

            Kubuntu 9.04, kernel 2.6.30rc6 x86_64, amd athlon x2 5600+ 2.8GHz, radeon hd3850

            Comment


            • #16
              There was a bit of discussion about performance results on IRC a little while ago; one thing to remember is that the patch only affects performance if the proper drm is installed and if EXA hardware acceleration is being used. If the driver is running with shadowfb acceleration then the patch won't make any difference...

              Comment


              • #17
                conholster,

                Thanks for trying my patch out and sharing your results. That is a lot more like I expected. Almost a 10% increase

                Comment


                • #18
                  Originally posted by bridgman View Post
                  If the driver is running with shadowfb acceleration then the patch won't make any difference...
                  Well, I'm sorry that my test results aren't what one would like them to be but if I was running with shadowfb acceleration I wouldn't get an Xv adapter, now would I?

                  Code:
                  $ xvinfo
                  X-Video Extension version 2.2
                  screen #0
                    Adaptor #0: "RadeonHD Textured Video"

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    No offense monraaf,

                    We didn't mean to offend you with our speculation on the IRC and I didn't think it would end up here. Sorry. It just seemed strange that your results for 1000 test rounds were so close. Another factor behind the IRC speculation was the fact I got better times on my slower laptop (91 seconds without the patch vs 85 seconds with it). I have done extensive and careful benchmarking on this patch and it just seems strange. Possible error on your part of doing the test was one thing that had to be taken into consideration however.

                    Seeing that someone got numbers close to what you had initially with the same speed processor albeit with a different card adds credibility to your results. With so few results to go off of your results are as valid as anybody's.

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Yeah, definitely no offence intended and the apology should be mine if that came off the wrong way. Just thought it was better if we talked straight rather than being sneaky and asking for a log

                      I think we were all expecting a bit more difference -- the ratio between CPU and GPU performance should definitely affect results (ie with a 3200 GPU you would see less speedup than with a 3850, since the 3200 is more likely to be GPU limited) but I didn't think there was enough parallelism in the current driver code to totally eliminate the effect of the patch.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X