Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15

Thread: Intel i915 Gallium3D Performance Examined

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    13,421

    Default Intel i915 Gallium3D Performance Examined

    Phoronix: Intel i915 Gallium3D Performance Examined

    Last week after a modern Intel Gallium3D driver was proposed for mainline Mesa, a side discussion ended up being ignited about making the i915 Gallium3D driver the default for older generations of Intel graphics hardware. To see where the i915 Gallium3D driver is at compared to the i915 Classic Mesa DRI driver, here are some new benchmarks from aging Intel i945 hardware.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=18658

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    418

    Default

    Its preformance is bad.... really bad. Has code been directly taken from the classic driver or was this a clean rewrite?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Pennsylvania, United States
    Posts
    1,748

    Default

    To be fair, the classic driver has probably had the crap optimized out of it. The performance of the new gallium driver is very respectable considering the limited amount of work that has gone into it and I'm sure if it is made the default that equal performance will be pulled out of it as the classic driver in time.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    504

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ericg View Post
    To be fair, the classic driver has probably had the crap optimized out of it. The performance of the new gallium driver is very respectable considering the limited amount of work that has gone into it and I'm sure if it is made the default that equal performance will be pulled out of it as the classic driver in time.
    Of course, that would actually require that i915g driver makes it as the default driver for older Intel hardware, otherwise there is really little incentive to keep working on it. Userbase can be a very powerful motivational tool.

    At least it appears to be usable for running an OpenGL-accelerated, composited desktop which all that flashy effects like wobbly windows fluidly without slowdown or lag. I consider that to be the minimum level of performance acceptable for any driver.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    137

    Default

    Where's the "examined" part of the article?

    All I see is benchmarks with similars results to what's already been shown before. I was hoping for an explanation on why performance isn't on par...

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    499

    Default

    "...is changing the default open-source Intel Linux graphics driver for old i915 through i945 IGPs (common to the first-generation Intel Atom netbooks)".

    Isn't it common to all atom netbooks except those with PowerVR? e.g. even those with integrated igp on-package, it's still i945 IGP, right?

    It's a pity that performance is so bad and even worse with the new driver. In the end, these benchmarks don't really show if normal desktop performance is better or worse, and that is the most important thing for these igps.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    4,733

    Default

    Hi Michael

    (don't you just love glossy screens - the first pic on the left)

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    179

    Default

    I wonder if worse performance can be related to the more features (or even higher OpenGL version?) exposed. Game could use them and performance would decrease then.

    Is there any easy way of disabling some feature to make OpenGL support the same between that 2 drivers?

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,908

    Default

    Someone from intel (ian or eric, i think?) posted a couple patches that brought the classic driver up to GL2.1 and a similar feature set to the gallium driver.

    It's really too bad that all the tests here were q3 based engines. I don't think that really tells us much of anything.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    3

    Default

    Strange... In my gentoo tests on laptop with exactly the same configuration (old Acer Extensa 5210 with gma950, 2 gigs of RAM and cpu upgraded to T5600) gallium driver is from 10 to 30% faster, than classic.

Posting Permissions

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