Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

r300g: Is it really accelerated?

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

  • r300g: Is it really accelerated?

    Last night, I upgraded my Ubuntu 10.04 to 10.10, reinstlled x-eggers and got latest xorg 7.10 dev code. I was running r300g on R520.

    To test sanity of the graphics stack, I fired up PTS and run lightmarks 2008. My score was 6.8 fps!

    I my have to ask, are those drivers really used 3D HW accerleration? I mean is one have to expect a lightmarks of just 6.8 fps?

    Am I doing something wrong?

  • #2
    Link:

    http://global.phoronix-test-suite.co...934-5554-10891

    Comment


    • #3
      glxinfo | grep OpenGL
      ## VGA ##
      AMD: X1950XTX, HD3870, HD5870
      Intel: GMA45, HD3000 (Core i5 2500K)

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by darkbasic View Post
        glxinfo | grep OpenGL
        driver: Gallium 0.4 on R520
        OpenGL: 2.1 Mesa 7.10-deve

        running HW accelerated driver, however, not seeing the HW performance.

        Comment


        • #5
          From the PTS report it looks as if you are booting an old kernel. For the rest it is hard to diagnose without seeing your log files. Try also with other applications than lightmarks.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by tormod View Post
            From the PTS report it looks as if you are booting an old kernel. For the rest it is hard to diagnose without seeing your log files. Try also with other applications than lightmarks.
            I am runing: Kernel: 2.6.35-020635rc6-generic (x86_64)

            This one of the latest RC kernel from mainline ppa. I will try other benchs too.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Beiruty View Post
              I am runing: Kernel: 2.6.35-020635rc6-generic (x86_64)

              This one of the latest RC kernel from mainline ppa. I will try other benchs too.
              The default maverick kernel is much newer You may also want to try the 2.6.36-RC kernel in the xorg-edgers maverick PPA.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by tormod View Post
                The default maverick kernel is much newer You may also want to try the 2.6.36-RC kernel in the xorg-edgers maverick PPA.
                Sorry, my mistake, later tonight I will upgrade the kernel and try again.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Beiruty View Post
                  Sorry, my mistake, later tonight I will upgrade the kernel and try again.
                  You've got recent kernels drm-next in the ubuntu mainline kernel page.

                  http://kernel.ubuntu.com/~kernel-ppa/mainline/drm-next/

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by rafirafi View Post
                    You've got recent kernels drm-next in the ubuntu mainline kernel page.

                    http://kernel.ubuntu.com/~kernel-ppa/mainline/drm-next/
                    Would be different from this one:

                    http://kernel.ubuntu.com/~kernel-ppa...-rc6-maverick/

                    What does drm-next signify?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      The DRM-development builds are:
                      the tip of the drm-next head of Dave Airlie's drm-2.6 repository daily

                      https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Kernel/MainlineBuilds

                      But shouldn't be so differrent as r300g seems +/- stable ?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I know that Lightsmark is slow. Is any other driver faster? What about Intel? I remember when Lightsmark was released and by that time it was a damn demanding benchmark, I tried to run it on R500, it was slow even with fglrx IIRC.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I'm getting an average of 20 fps on an RV570. I can't recall that Intel is any faster.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by whizse View Post
                            I can't recall that Intel is any faster.
                            Not a surprise. Intel driver is so slow that it will probably become slower than llvmpipe in the future
                            ## VGA ##
                            AMD: X1950XTX, HD3870, HD5870
                            Intel: GMA45, HD3000 (Core i5 2500K)

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              21 fps with HD4200 IGP, proprietary drivers on Win7, 1920x1200...

                              ... if anyone cares

                              A lot of the tests were running down around 7-8 fps.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X