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

Thread: Nouveau Drags Behind Intel & Radeon For Linux 2D Performance

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,793

    Default Nouveau Drags Behind Intel & Radeon For Linux 2D Performance

    Phoronix: Nouveau Drags Behind Intel & Radeon For Linux 2D Performance

    While 3D/OpenGL is our primary focus of performance tests when it comes to graphics cards on Linux, it's always interesting to go back and check on the 2D performance as it's still important for the Linux desktop experience. The 2D performance is becoming interesting right now as well due to Intel's driver defaulting to SNA and GLAMOR acceleration being tried by some drivers for faster 2D over OpenGL. In this article we have some fresh 2D benchmarks of Intel, NVIDIA, and AMD graphics hardware running an updated open-source GPU driver stack on Ubuntu 14.04 LTS.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=20034

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    2

    Default Wrong benchmarks for Intel?

    In the article you say that the backend for the intel driver is SNA, but in the summary it says GLAMOR, which seems to correlate better with the numbers (in comparison with this article)

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,458

    Default

    Quick question... the article text suggests that the Intel driver is using SNA...

    The default acceleration methods for each of the drivers was used: Intel's 3.0 pre-release drivers default to SNA (rather than UXA on older series), Nouveau uses EXA, and the Radeon driver uses EXA by default for the Radeon HD 6000 series and older while the Radeon HD 7000 series and newer is limited to only supporting GLAMOR.
    ... but the screen grab above it suggests that the Intel driver is using GLAMOR. Am I misreading something ?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    3

    Default

    I also runned this test on my system, and i found some strange results. A couple of times i have much better performance despite that i have:
    - 3.13 kernel
    - 10.0.2 mesa
    - A much older cpu (2500k)

    I think the 2D performance of glamor on intel is still not equivalent :=)

    http://openbenchmarking.org/result/1...SO-1403134PL86

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Moscow
    Posts
    61

    Default

    r600g results are suspiciously decent. I have a 6770 and it was way slower at running Aquaria (native build from source code) than Intel's ancient Q33 was on the same machine. I can't believe r600g beats Intel's SNA now!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,929

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shnatsel View Post
    r600g results are suspiciously decent. I have a 6770 and it was way slower at running Aquaria (native build from source code) than Intel's ancient Q33 was on the same machine. I can't believe r600g beats Intel's SNA now!
    Aquaria is an OpenGL game, and it has pretty much nothing to do with 2D acceleration tested here.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    MA, USA
    Posts
    1,302

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shnatsel View Post
    r600g results are suspiciously decent. I have a 6770 and it was way slower at running Aquaria (native build from source code) than Intel's ancient Q33 was on the same machine. I can't believe r600g beats Intel's SNA now!
    While beating SNA is quite a feat as of today, a 6770 is better than any of intel's GPUs so I think the sheer processing power of the GPU is why it happened to win. Keep in mind too that the radeon drivers have made tremendous progress. Ever since I ditched catalyst, I noticed I actually get as good or even better performance out of the open source drivers in most things (such as Portal or the Heaven benchmark). Some programs (such as Trine 2) perform a little worse, though not enough to complain. If I could go back in time 2-3 years ago and tell people that would happen, nobody would believe me.

    BTW, I own 2 HD5750s. I hope someone implements crossfire support in the near future; the extra performance I'd gain from that would "fix" the performance losses I get.


    Anyway, while nouveau obviously didn't do that great, I honestly expected worse. Considering the shortcomings and obstacles of the nouveau team, they've made better progress than what we give them credit for.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    939

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shnatsel View Post
    I have a 6770 and it was way slower at running Aquaria (native build from source code) than Intel's ancient Q33 was on the same machine.
    You can fill a bug at https://bugs.freedesktop.org Drivers/Gallium/r600 if that game is so slow... as i remember there is option in config file to turn off fbo maybe that can help with performance .

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schmidtbag View Post
    While beating SNA is quite a feat as of today, a 6770 is better than any of intel's GPUs so I think the sheer processing power of the GPU is why it happened to win. Keep in mind too that the radeon drivers have made tremendous progress. Ever since I ditched catalyst, I noticed I actually get as good or even better performance out of the open source drivers in most things (such as Portal or the Heaven benchmark). Some programs (such as Trine 2) perform a little worse, though not enough to complain. If I could go back in time 2-3 years ago and tell people that would happen, nobody would believe me.

    BTW, I own 2 HD5750s. I hope someone implements crossfire support in the near future; the extra performance I'd gain from that would "fix" the performance losses I get.


    Anyway, while nouveau obviously didn't do that great, I honestly expected worse. Considering the shortcomings and obstacles of the nouveau team, they've made better progress than what we give them credit for.
    Assuming this earlier article which compares the different acceleration backends in the intel driver is correct, this one isn't - it's quite clearly the GLAMOR backend that has been benchmarked in this one. Case in point - look at the "GTK Widget: GtkDrawingArea - Circles" in both articles; with the same hardware SNA gets 10.13 in one article and 448.23 in the other...

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Madison, WI, USA
    Posts
    874

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bridgman View Post
    Quick question... the article text suggests that the Intel driver is using SNA...



    ... but the screen grab above it suggests that the Intel driver is using GLAMOR. Am I misreading something ?
    From Xorg.0.log on the Intel machine (after digging through openbenchmarking.org):

    (II) intel(0): Use GLAMOR acceleration.

    So, no, you're not mistaken. The intel graphics option was also running glamor instead of SNA.

Posting Permissions

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