Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 24

Thread: This GLX Patch Can Really Boosts The FPS (~ +60%)

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    215

    Default

    Does anyone know what values would be on the same hardware with direct rendering?
    I mean, what's the difference in speed with indirect rendering and this patch and direct rendering?

  2. #12

    Default Impact of using indirect GLX vs DRI

    Using padman@1024x768 locally:
    Code:
                      i5-2500   c2q/g45    c2q/q35
    Direct:             145        94         66
    Indirect:            74        35         42

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    174

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ickle View Post
    Using padman@1024x768 locally:
    Code:
                      i5-2500   c2q/g45    c2q/q35
    Direct:             145        94         66
    Indirect:            74        35         42
    Is this with or without the new patches?

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    647

    Default

    Can any one enlighten the differenc between direct indirect rendering? And when they are used?

  5. #15

    Default

    Using padman@1024x768 locally:
    Code:
                      i5-2500   c2q/g45    c2q/q35
    Direct:             145        94         66
    Indirect:            74        35         42
    Unpatched:           39        25         28

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,385

    Default

    Indirect rendering goes through the X server -- application makes GL calls, those are turned into X protocol packets and sent to the server process via IPC. The X server then calls the 3D driver (mesa or proprietary) to do the drawing, so drawing happens in the X server's process.

    With direct rendering the application makes GL calls then those calls go directly to the 3D driver. There is a protocol called DRI which allows the 3D driver to efficiently check with the X server to ensure that the window has not moved since the last drawing operation.

    Indirect rendering can work over a network or (presumably) between virtual machines; direct rendering requires that the application reside on the same machine as the graphics hardware. Indirect rendering is useful for applications such as compositors, where the compositor is picking up content rendered by the X server.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,718

    Default

    so he got a big speedup with games that are run in a typical 'server here, client there' setup of the X world.

    Which is used by almost... nobody. Yeah, superduper, I am so excited.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    3,046

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by energyman View Post
    so he got a big speedup with games that are run in a typical 'server here, client there' setup of the X world.

    Which is used by almost... nobody. Yeah, superduper, I am so excited.
    Not everyone plays games with GLX...

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    315

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Svartalf View Post
    Not everyone plays games with GLX...
    Intel only cares about cloud. Which means in about a year. I'll be using arch and ripping all their crap out before compiling.
    Dear microsoft, Dear Intel, Dear IBM. FLUCK YO CLOUD RIGGER!!!

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    315

    Default

    Since you cant edit.
    You aint indirectly rendering jack for me on the cloud intel. Stuff it.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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