Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 26

Thread: A 13 Line Patch That Boosts Intel Sandy Bridge Performance

  1. #11

    Default

    And as with most programming the more manpower you have the better software you make (not always but in most cases) as people in the team can "specialize" and that tends to be better for perfomance

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BenderRodriguez View Post
    What you are missing here is that Linux driver teams tend to be A LOT smaller than their Windows counterteams. It is a simple fact in life that you put most of the money where it is most important which is as of right now Windows users.
    Ok, that may be reason. But they did manage to get comparable performance with the Sandy Bridge, even with a 'simple' driver. Though I don't really know how 'simple' either the Sandy Bridge or those older generation drivers are.

  3. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nite View Post
    Ok, that may be reason. But they did manage to get comparable performance with the Sandy Bridge, even with a 'simple' driver. Though I don't really know how 'simple' either the Sandy Bridge or those older generation drivers are.
    Performance may be almost similar but you get a lot less features than on Windows like video hardware acceleration etc. Everything you get later than on Windows but with the added bonus that you get that instantly when booting without installing any drivers

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BenderRodriguez View Post
    What you are missing here is that Linux driver teams tend to be A LOT smaller than their Windows counterteams. It is a simple fact in life that you put most of the money where it is most important which is as of right now Windows users.
    Its vice versa - you put more people in driver team, get better driver, get more users and receive more money. Windows is unimportant.

  5. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crazycheese View Post
    Its vice versa - you put more people in driver team, get better driver, get more users and receive more money. Windows is unimportant.
    There is some truth in what you are saying. That's why i bought an ATI video card instead of nVidia. Even though i miss some things i would have with closed nVidia drivers i decided i should vote with my wallet for the company that supports FOSS. I hope they are reading this

    So what you are saying is at least true in my case

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    29

    Default

    Could Phoronix run this with the S3TC module perhaps and see if that boosts performance further any?

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    29

    Default

    Oops, I seem to have killed the thread.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BenderRodriguez View Post
    There is some truth in what you are saying. That's why i bought an ATI video card instead of nVidia. Even though i miss some things i would have with closed nVidia drivers i decided i should vote with my wallet for the company that supports FOSS. I hope they are reading this

    So what you are saying is at least true in my case
    If AMD/ATI would shift further and actually allow you pay of that foss development as they do with windows drivers, yes.
    But currently its not the case.

    FOSS drivers have their shelf and its designated to be lower than their proprietary drivers. So if you want performance out of your card(why you actually buy the card) it does not matter which brand you pick.

  9. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crazycheese View Post
    If AMD/ATI would shift further and actually allow you pay of that foss development as they do with windows drivers, yes.
    But currently its not the case.

    FOSS drivers have their shelf and its designated to be lower than their proprietary drivers. So if you want performance out of your card(why you actually buy the card) it does not matter which brand you pick.
    I can't agree with you here. Have you seen gallium benchmarks? I am using gentoo and gallium drivers and besides being in the kernel i get very decent performance and stability! I can play any game i can with closed drivers without the headache. I should make some benchmarks to be sure but my performance isn't horribly lower than with proprietary drivers

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BenderRodriguez View Post
    I can't agree with you here. Have you seen gallium benchmarks? I am using gentoo and gallium drivers and besides being in the kernel i get very decent performance and stability! I can play any game i can with closed drivers without the headache. I should make some benchmarks to be sure but my performance isn't horribly lower than with proprietary drivers
    Yes, the performance is within acceptable range - about 40% or less compared to the 100% that card "could have achieved", depending on task. The feature matrix incl. 3D support is also around 30-40%. I never had stability issues or headache when I had nvidia, btw - the only thing that distracted me was that it was proprietary and I'm more ATI fan. After searching for exact R700 chip 4670 (although there were unsupported evergreens already) I discovered opensource driver was not working at all and fglrx crashed my desktop hardly. This is why I sold the card and used 9800GT. Then, after more and more improvements were announced I risked again at took 4770 - and it worked. But the progress was slow and ..I mentioned the feature/performance already. So after I discovered that the reason for the whole fallback is ONLY due to absence of manpower I offered to employ some form of registering program on AMD site without any success. People just yell its falling back, but refuse to think or change it. Then I had become an answer that proprietary driver will for ever exist and opensource is destined to be a sub-product I've given up, to me it does not make sense, I refuse to support a policy where opensource is handled like shareware(try and buy) model. This isn't opensource, it is still proprietary model. There are still many many things to be done, but current formula is not something meaning business.
    Even if Intel has overall weak gfx possibilites on chip, their current efforts allow to squeeze almost the maximum out of it. And again, it was not proposed as GFX processor, its mainly CPU; and there is still progress.

Posting Permissions

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