Originally posted by Niccola
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Mobility HD2400 + ubuntu 10.10
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by Kjella View PostMy bet would be that if the open source driver is 10x faster than the closed source driver, it's probably not doing what it should do. Maybe some sort of stub function that doesn't actually compute what the benchmark is trying to measure? The other number seems reasonable, if you match fglrx in performance that is *good*.
One thing that fglrx driver don't "make me happy" is the bad and bad and bad and worst vsync that I ever seen.
To see just a video, or moving window tearing appears and "burn my eyes hardly"
If I could remove the tearing of fglrx, maybe I use it in my desktop PC (with a HD 3870).
But in my notebook, its garanteed the use of radeon driver. Because I just use it for college usage. The hardest thing that I use in this is compiz.
Another reason to try the open driver is the fact that open-source. I think being the free-software community is extremely good
Comment
-
Originally posted by Kjella View PostMy bet would be that if the open source driver is 10x faster than the closed source driver, it's probably not doing what it should do. Maybe some sort of stub function that doesn't actually compute what the benchmark is trying to measure? The other number seems reasonable, if you match fglrx in performance that is *good*.
Comment
-
Originally posted by nanonyme View PostAgreed, those numbers don't sound credible. Even the open one matching fglrx in performance doesn't. Then again, fglrx having the 1k fps and radeon being 175-178 fps would be very much more credible. Re-testing warranted.
radeon driver first:
1- without drm and no compiz effects:
2- With DRM but no compiz effects:
3- Without DRM with compiz effects:
4- With DRM and compiz effects:
FGLRX driver now:
1- without drm and no compiz effects:
2- With DRM but no compiz effects:
3- Without DRM with compiz effects:
4- With DRM and compiz effects:
5- FGLRX with all options activated:
Compare yourself the output...
I've considered the output that fglrx is with all options activated.
This options are the quality options in CCC and following options in xorg.conf:
Code:Section "Module" ... Load "GLcore" Load "glx" Load "dri" ... EndSection Section "Device" Identifier "ATI Technologies Inc ATI Default Card" Driver "fglrx" Option "VideoOverlay" "on" Option "OpenGLOverlay" "on" Option "Capabilities" "0x00000800" Option "FSAAEnable" "yes" Option "FSAAScale" "4" BusID "PCI:4:0:0" EndSection
Comment
-
You're comparing the open driver with vsync off versus the catalyst driver with vsync on. The card can generate hundreds of the frames per second, but your screen operates at 60 Hz so it can not display more than 60 frames per second.
With vsynch on it'll only measure the 60 fps actually rendered to your monitor and give you a low score, if you turn it off the fps and score will be much higher. Vsync should be off for performance benchmarks, and particular not compare scores with it on and off...
Comment
-
Originally posted by Kjella View PostYou're comparing the open driver with vsync off versus the catalyst driver with vsync on. The card can generate hundreds of the frames per second, but your screen operates at 60 Hz so it can not display more than 60 frames per second.
With vsynch on it'll only measure the 60 fps actually rendered to your monitor and give you a low score, if you turn it off the fps and score will be much higher. Vsync should be off for performance benchmarks, and particular not compare scores with it on and off...
Well, and what would I do to have more than 60 fps and NO video/rendering/desktop tearing?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Niccola View PostAlright! I understand that!
Well, and what would I do to have more than 60 fps and NO video/rendering/desktop tearing?
Comment
-
You don't. If you update the screen faster than the refresh rate, you get tearing.
If you're hitting 60 fps with vsync on you are already seeing the best your monitor can display. If you want anything better you'd need a faster monitor, though I doubt you'll notice the difference between 60 fps on a 120 Hz display and 120 fps on a 120 Hz display. It is mostly important for benchmarks and scaling, if we can render 300 fps at this resolution, you can render 100 fps at this resolution and 50 fps at this resolution. In itself it makes no sense to render 300 fps of anything, your mind can't keep up anyway.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Kjella View PostYour eyes, I should say. I think the cones in your eye is the limit, though biology is not my field. Blame the edit limit...
Look, I've another question. Some people says about a Compiz Benchmark that automatically adjust the best settings to performance.
I've googled it but without results... You guys can tell me how to run and apply the compiz benchmark in my distro??
thank you guys!
Comment
Comment