Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Performance Work Coming Up For Mesa 7.11

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

  • Performance Work Coming Up For Mesa 7.11

    Phoronix: Performance Work Coming Up For Mesa 7.11

    While Mesa 7.10 was just released, there's already been some work beginning to land in the mainline Mesa code-base for the ATI Radeon Gallium3D drivers to improve the performance...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=ODk5OQ

  • #2
    r300g seems rather stable in most situations, so any performance gains are welcomed.

    Comment


    • #3
      Yeah, I wonder how well r300g/c compare to Catalyst 9.3. I know we've had that r600g comparision recently, but the r300 drivers seem much more mature and prolly have seen more optimization as well.

      Comment


      • #4
        Yeah, if only r300g was any usable on my laptop with an Xpress 200m, instead of displaying fuzzy random horizontal lines...

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by NeoBrain View Post
          Yeah, I wonder how well r300g/c compare to Catalyst 9.3. I know we've had that r600g comparision recently, but the r300 drivers seem much more mature and prolly have seen more optimization as well.
          The last comparison i saw had it between 50-60%. With the recent optimizations Marek has committed I'd guess we might be over 60% now. It would be an interesting test for Michael to run again. Especially if he could do it on a couple machines - one with a really fast CPU and another with something much slower, to see if the driver is CPU limited.

          Comment


          • #6
            Don't forget that r300g covers a very broad hardware spectrum

            Originally posted by smitty3268 View Post
            The last comparison i saw had it between 50-60%.
            r300g covers old R300 chips all the way up to more recent R535+. And it must be difficult to get meaningful comparisons anyway, when Catalyst 9.3 is only compatible with horribly outdated X servers.

            Personally, I'm much more impressed with the functionality and stability of r300g than I ever was with the Catalyst drivers, even if r300g's 3D performance has not yet been optimised.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by chrisr View Post
              r300g covers old R300 chips all the way up to more recent R535+. And it must be difficult to get meaningful comparisons anyway, when Catalyst 9.3 is only compatible with horribly outdated X servers.
              I think a comparison would still be useful. Even if other components have helped to speed-up r300g we'd still be able to confirm that there is room for improvement.

              Comment


              • #8
                There is always room for improvements. ATI were developing their proprietary driver with a huge budget for 8 years I think? We can't surely compete with that, we can only get closer to its speed...

                I think Dave Airlie compared performance between r300g and fglrx some time ago and the numbers weren't very good. I can only say that there has been some new optimizations added recently, so it's now probably better than it was.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by marek View Post
                  There is always room for improvements. ATI were developing their proprietary driver with a huge budget for 8 years I think? We can't surely compete with that, we can only get closer to its speed...

                  I think Dave Airlie compared performance between r300g and fglrx some time ago and the numbers weren't very good. I can only say that there has been some new optimizations added recently, so it's now probably better than it was.
                  Well you guys tried really hard and did a wonderful job. It's just too late. The military beat up people, sociopath lie constantly model doesn't work at these population levels. They'll kill a bunch of people this year and those people will simply drop out of the collective conciousness by not returning to source. Kind of like the 60's drop out but with teeth.
                  Linux will likely get swallowed by apple in a couple years who will use python to spy on everybody.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Give us some of that stuff you're smoking, dude.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by smitty3268 View Post
                      The last comparison i saw had it between 50-60%. With the recent optimizations Marek has committed I'd guess we might be over 60% now.
                      The newer catalyst driver is _way_ faster then Gallium, like here:
                      http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...ver_q111&num=4
                      or even worse, like here:
                      http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...ver_q111&num=8

                      Is it the whole code or just a few parts in Gallium that make it lag behind that much? Is it like "all we need is rewrite GLSL" to match Catalyst or is it like "we need to rewrite pretty much anything"? Just wondering..

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I think he meant r300g, not r600g. r300g can only be compared against older Catalyst drivers (newer ones don't support old GPUs.)

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by cl333r View Post
                          Is it the whole code or just a few parts in Gallium that make it lag behind that much? Is it like "all we need is rewrite GLSL" to match Catalyst or is it like "we need to rewrite pretty much anything"? Just wondering..
                          If we knew exactly what needed to be fixed we'd do it. It comes down to lots of profiling. The closed driver is build on a stack specifically tuned to AMD hardware that was honed over the last 10-15 years by 10-20x the developers of the open source driver. Mesa is aimed at making it easy to support various graphics APIs on a wide range of hardware.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by agd5f View Post
                            If we knew exactly what needed to be fixed we'd do it. It comes down to lots of profiling. The closed driver is build on a stack specifically tuned to AMD hardware that was honed over the last 10-15 years by 10-20x the developers of the open source driver. Mesa is aimed at making it easy to support various graphics APIs on a wide range of hardware.
                            Tell that to the "blobs must die, only open source drivers should be allowed in Linux" bozos.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by cl333r View Post
                              The newer catalyst driver is _way_ faster then Gallium, like here:
                              http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...ver_q111&num=4
                              or even worse, like here:
                              http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...ver_q111&num=8

                              Is it the whole code or just a few parts in Gallium that make it lag behind that much? Is it like "all we need is rewrite GLSL" to match Catalyst or is it like "we need to rewrite pretty much anything"? Just wondering..
                              Yeah, we were talking about r300g, not the r600 and newer cards. To be fair, if AMD had continued supporting those older cards they would probably be faster now than they were in the old Cat 9.3 drivers, but there's no way to test that. r300g is much more stable and works better than the old Catalyst driver ever did, so it's not like anyone is going to switch back, but i still think it would be interesting to see the comparison to get an idea of how the current driver compares to what used to be considered acceptable speed for that hardware.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X