Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456
Results 51 to 57 of 57

Thread: AMD R600/700 2D Performance: Open vs. Closed Drivers

  1. #51
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Vienna, Austria; Germany; hello world :)
    Posts
    622

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nanonyme View Post
    That's not really relevant in this... Windows with or Without seems more responsive than Linux with or without compositing.
    which "Windows" ?

    you already tried a kernel with BFS and/or 2.6.32-rc1 ?

    those have the latest changes in cpu scheduling which should make desktop interactivity significantly better

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    1,577

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kernelOfTruth View Post
    which "Windows" ?
    But Windows 7 RC, naturally. You don't honestly think I'd pay for any of their earlier productions? (actually might for Windows 7) Anyway, getting offtopic here.

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    206

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by V!NCENT View Post
    So now you have shitty performance with the 2D desktop (burden on the CPU) and the only way to activate GPU accelerated desktop was by enabling compositing which was also putting more burden on system performance.
    I wonder why so many semi-professionals have the idea that 2D=CPU and 3D=GPU, and therefor "3D is faster".

    I don't recall who often I have heard people stating that 2D rendering will be accelerated by your 3D engine because of compiz or similar bullshit.

    2D is accelerated by the GPU if the driver is capable (currently all major dirvers except fglrx). period.

    - Clemens

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,264

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Linuxhippy View Post
    I wonder why so many semi-professionals have the idea that 2D=CPU and 3D=GPU, and therefor "3D is faster".

    I don't recall who often I have heard people stating that 2D rendering will be accelerated by your 3D engine because of compiz or similar bullshit.

    2D is accelerated by the GPU if the driver is capable (currently all major dirvers except fglrx). period.
    2D on Windows Vista and 7 is just as much accelerated by the GPU as CPU Ray tracing is. 2D in NT6.0 is pure fallback. So like: hey let's render this in software and then send the entire desktop to the framebuffer. 3D in NT6.0 is in some cases faster because it actually mostly runs inside the GPU. Catch my drift? This performance gain is mostly held back by compositing which puts extra burden on the GPU. It is also why games like Crysis runs slower in Vista than it does on XP, while it's designed for Vista and even then it is not crippled (on XP you miss some graphical features and Crysis only runs on one core).

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    206

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by V!NCENT View Post
    2D on Windows Vista and 7 is just as much accelerated by the GPU as CPU Ray tracing is.
    GDI is software-only. However WPF as well as GDI+ now sit on top of D3D. Even Java does its 2D drawing using D3D. So basically you say that a legacy API is software-only, not 2D in general.
    The same goes for Xorg. Yes X11 core drawing is mostly fallback, but XRender is usually accelerated quite well, despite the fact that its 2D.

    3D in NT6.0 is in some cases faster because it actually mostly runs inside the GPU. Catch my drift?
    I don't see how "3D" differs between XP and Vista, when talking about D3D or OpenGL.

    This performance gain is mostly held back by compositing which puts extra burden on the GPU. It is also why games like Crysis runs slower in Vista than it does on XP, while it's designed for Vista and even then it is not crippled (on XP you miss some graphical features and Crysis only runs on one core).
    As far as I know, compositing is disabled for fullscreen games (would be really stupid anyway).

    - Clemens
    Last edited by Linuxhippy; 10-03-2009 at 09:33 AM.

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Vienna, Austria; Germany; hello world :)
    Posts
    622

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Linuxhippy View Post
    2D is accelerated by the GPU if the driver is capable (currently all major dirvers except fglrx). period.

    - Clemens
    so please explain what the setting:

    Option "Textured2D" "on"

    means for fglrx

  7. #57
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    206

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kernelOfTruth View Post
    so please explain what the setting:
    Option "Textured2D" "on"
    means for fglrx
    Well, even without "Textured2D" fglrx does a bit of hw acceleration, Texture2D adds another few operarations and is known to often cause troubles.
    So if a driver accelerates 10% of operations stable, and 25% if I turn on experimental switches, I don't call it capable
    Last edited by Linuxhippy; 10-03-2009 at 02:32 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •