Originally posted by dungeon
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Ubuntu 13.04 Desktop Gaming Performance Comparison
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by curaga View PostWhich parts? Might want to report those as bugs (to either mesa or stk, depending on the cause).
OpenBenchmarking.org, Phoronix Test Suite, Linux benchmarking, automated benchmarking, benchmarking results, benchmarking repository, open source benchmarking, benchmarking test profiles
Compared with this:
OpenBenchmarking.org, Phoronix Test Suite, Linux benchmarking, automated benchmarking, benchmarking results, benchmarking repository, open source benchmarking, benchmarking test profiles
And then results with intel:
OpenBenchmarking.org, Phoronix Test Suite, Linux benchmarking, automated benchmarking, benchmarking results, benchmarking repository, open source benchmarking, benchmarking test profiles
Could someone rerun supertuxkart with current radeon on non-unity maybe.Last edited by dungeon; 31 January 2013, 05:19 AM.
Comment
-
Don't composite fullscreen windows
I guess that all compositor where tested without their respective option to disable compositing on fullscreen. That would explain why they are all in the same ballpark. For Enlightenment, we don't turn this feature on by default as most driver out there are buggy and I guess all compositor have the same behavior. So I recommend to go in Settings/Composite/Advanced/Memory/Don't composite fullscreen windows for Enlightenment if you want better number.
Now if you look at the number as a benchmark for just how fast compositor are at pushing frame, it is still interesting. I am wondering why some test case show E17 as been slow when other it is more at lead of other composite manager. I should spend time playing I guess :-)
Comment
-
Originally posted by mark_ View Postso: the less complex the WM the more FPS. What about xdm? If Xfce gives me 10fps more than KDE and xdm gives me 10fps more than Xfce this could be totally worth it for a gaming machine. Please include xdm next time.
Comment
-
Originally posted by mark_ View Postso: the less complex the WM the more FPS. What about xdm? If Xfce gives me 10fps more than KDE and xdm gives me 10fps more than Xfce this could be totally worth it for a gaming machine. Please include xdm next time.
Originally posted by oleidOne thing that I find interresting ist, that gnome-shell is sometimes the slowest and sometimes (one of) the fastest desktop(s) according to these benchmarks. How can that be? Shouldn't there be a uniform slowdown due to composite?
Comment
Comment