Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 16

Thread: AMD Radeon Northern Islands: EXA vs. GLAMOR

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,611

    Default AMD Radeon Northern Islands: EXA vs. GLAMOR

    Phoronix: AMD Radeon Northern Islands: EXA vs. GLAMOR

    Next week I will have out some interesting 2D benchmarks between Intel, Radeon, and Nouveau on the latest open-source drivers... Those results are very interesting but for some other interesting data to get out prior to the weekend is a EXA vs. GLAMOR 2D acceleration comparison for a Radeon HD 6870 graphics processor using the Linux 3.14 kernel and Mesa 10.2-devel...

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

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    41

    Default Xserver 1.16

    From my understanding, the only useful GLamor code is that which is merged into what will become x server 1,16.

    All performance optimisations and work are going into that.

    While for card without EXA etc the current tests are sueful, surely for an across the boards test the only useul tests would be for this future code that will be as part of xserver 1.16?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,360

    Default

    What version of glamor was used? There have been a lot of improvements to glamor in the last few months.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,360

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by You- View Post
    From my understanding, the only useful GLamor code is that which is merged into what will become x server 1,16.

    All performance optimisations and work are going into that.

    While for card without EXA etc the current tests are sueful, surely for an across the boards test the only useul tests would be for this future code that will be as part of xserver 1.16?
    For older distros with older xservers it makes sense to continue to maintain the standalone glamor tree, so there will continue to be improvements there as well.

  5. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by agd5f View Post
    What version of glamor was used? There have been a lot of improvements to glamor in the last few months.
    The test was done using my PPA (the opengl version show the PPA sign) which has glamor git. According to the mesa git version glamor git version should be just before the recent big merge.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Madison, WI, USA
    Posts
    865

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by You- View Post
    From my understanding, the only useful GLamor code is that which is merged into what will become x server 1,16.

    All performance optimisations and work are going into that.

    While for card without EXA etc the current tests are sueful, surely for an across the boards test the only useul tests would be for this future code that will be as part of xserver 1.16?
    From: http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/driver/glamor/log/

    It looks like many of the recent performance enhancements have been backported to the standalone library. The push happened just over a day ago, so it's probably not included in the tests that Michael just did (based on oibaf's comment).

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Madison, WI, USA
    Posts
    865

    Default

    I just did a comparison on my CEDAR (radeon 5400) with: x11perf -f8text

    It's just a single benchmark, but it's one of those that is spefically called out as being improved in one of the patches.

    Using glamor from xorg-edgers: 12100 ?/sec
    glamor git with glamor/mesa debug symbols: 970000 ?/sec
    glamor git without glamor/mesa debug symbols: 2500000 ?/sec
    exa: 7290000 ?/sec

    So the performance improvements are definitely present in the separate glamor library. This test is still not faster than EXA on my card, but the card is pretty low-end and the CPU is an i7-2600k. I can try again at home sometime on my radeon 7850, which might perform a tad better (but EXA isn't available to compare against there).

    Note for the devs: glamor with --enable-debug is busted at the moment. There's two broken asserts in glamor.c that look like this:
    assert(!glamor_priv->ctx.get_count);

    I believe that the ctx member of glamor_priv was removed. Non-debug builds work fine, however.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Orange County, CA
    Posts
    76

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Veerappan View Post
    From: http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/driver/glamor/log/

    It looks like many of the recent performance enhancements have been backported to the standalone library. The push happened just over a day ago, so it's probably not included in the tests that Michael just did (based on oibaf's comment).
    Awesome! Time to try a new build. The recent radeonsi code has been very stable for me (except for the crash displaying large JPGs in Firefox) but the performance wasn't quite there yet.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Madison, WI, USA
    Posts
    865

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rrohbeck View Post
    Awesome! Time to try a new build. The recent radeonsi code has been very stable for me (except for the crash displaying large JPGs in Firefox) but the performance wasn't quite there yet.
    xorg-edgers saucy already has the latest glamor git built. Not sure if oibaf's already updated his PPA. Of course, if you're not running Ubuntu, use whatever method is appropriate (PKGBUILD, ebuild, rpm, etc).

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    884

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rrohbeck View Post
    Awesome! Time to try a new build. The recent radeonsi code has been very stable for me (except for the crash displaying large JPGs in Firefox) but the performance wasn't quite there yet.
    Huh, JPEGs in Firefox crashed radeonsi also?

    As i know they tried to fix it for EXA supported cards here http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/dri...c7801270615b9c but that does not help here on r200, i can get that fixed only if i set agp aperture to be 1/4 of avilable vram and no more than that .

    But if it crashed with glamor also, then i think ttm maybe just doing some weird stuff .
    Last edited by dungeon; 03-14-2014 at 07:36 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
  •