Open-Source Radeon Takes On AMD Catalyst In 2D Performance

[lovenemesis]

OpenGL renderer string: Gallium 0.4 on llvmpipe (LLVM 3.4, 128 bits)

This line shows that your are using software rendering powered llvmpipe, rather than GPU.
The HD8330 in your A4-5000 wasn't recognized somehow.

Maybe you should try to upgrade your kernel and libdrm, even mesa and xorg radeon driver.

[smitty3268]

This line shows that your are using software rendering powered llvmpipe, rather than GPU.
The HD8330 in your A4-5000 wasn't recognized somehow.

Maybe you should try to upgrade your kernel and libdrm, even mesa and xorg radeon driver.

I think he's just missing libglamor, although i don't know if debian's ati ddx has glamor support enabled either, so he might need a new version of it as well.

[dungeon]

xserver 1.16 will came out in just two weeks (shortly after release it will be in Debian Sid, thus making radeonsi work by default), making libglamor obsolete and uneeded lib .

[oleid]

Glamor is slow. The article shows that the catalyst 2d is just slower. It never was so good anyway.

I have nothing against glamor. I have a HD 7750, use the opensource driver and have no regrets.

But comparing EXA and glamor, glamor loses by a great margin. It has the advantage in adding new cards. EXA is hard to add new cards..

Glamor is as fast as exa, according to the article. Or did I miss something entirely? The older cards all use exa and they perform similar to the latest Radeon in the test. I'm not even comparing the results to the proprietary driver.

[Creak]

xserver 1.16 will came out in just two weeks (shortly after release it will be in Debian Sid, thus making radeonsi work by default), making libglamor obsolete and uneeded lib .

I don't understand... is Glamor different from libglamor???
Because I thought Glamor was the future of 2D rendering.

[dungeon]

I don't understand... is Glamor different from libglamor???
Because I thought Glamor was the future of 2D rendering.

Both are glamor of course , but libglamor was separate lib which is used with xservers up to the version 1.15, now with xserver 1.16 glamor acceleration is part of xserver, so users of xserver 1.16 does not need that separate lib anymore .

So you need this with xserver up to the 1.15.

http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/driver/glamor/

Now with xserver 1.16 it is part of the xserver:

http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/xserver/log/glamor

[oleid]

I don't understand... is Glamor different from libglamor???
Because I thought Glamor was the future of 2D rendering.

AFAIK it's basically the same, just moved into the X server as a generic 2D driver.

[Creak]

Both are glamor of course , but libglamor was separate lib which is used with xservers up to the version 1.15, now with xserver 1.16 glamor acceleration is part of xserver, so users of xserver 1.16 does not need that separate lib anymore .

So you need this with xserver up to the 1.15.

http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/driver/glamor/

Now with xserver 1.16 it is part of the xserver:

http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/xserver/log/glamor

Thanks!
Does this merge into Xserver 1.16 really changes the performances?
Or it's just that now it's activated by default and so it's an improvement for everyone?

[oleid]

Thanks!
Does this merge into Xserver 1.16 really changes the performances?
Or it's just that now it's activated by default and so it's an improvement for everyone?

It will, as there are some more improvements merged additionally. Some worst case scenarios are up to 5 five times faster (AFAIR).

[dungeon]

Thanks!
Does this merge into Xserver 1.16 really changes the performances?
Or it's just that now it's activated by default and so it's an improvement for everyone?

Yes it changes, it is improved version of course (althorough some of those improvments/fixes are backported for users of lib too) for example gtkperf drawing tests they are normal now with glamor in xserver 1.16 , etc .

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=68524