Sorry, but the reason is that the benchmarks are CPU limited. They are limited by the benchmark saturating a single CPU. At least Intel is... In other words, these benchmarks are at their limit for determining the differences between drivers and GPUs and are not that representative of 2D workloads.
Originally Posted by schmidtbag
id really like to see if SNA yields a much more of an overhead for being this big.
maybe one could add CPU workloads (and frequencies) id really like to know what they bought their 2D performance with. and if its really worth it. (ok i think there are not many cases where all cpu cores are fully utilised but i could imagine, that with with multiple executions of these tests in parallel things might change due to CPU limitations then, wouldnt they? (IF (!) things were not CPU limited now - if they are it would mean that SNA uses some kind of cunning preparation and branching of paths if my understanding is right)