1. Computers
  2. Display Drivers
  3. Graphics Cards
  4. Memory
  5. Motherboards
  6. Processors
  7. Software
  8. Storage
  9. Operating Systems


Facebook RSS Twitter Twitter Google Plus


Phoronix Test Suite

OpenBenchmarking.org

ATI Open vs. Closed-Source Performance

Michael Larabel

Published on 4 November 2007
Written by Michael Larabel
Page 1 of 4 - 2 Comments

This past Friday we had delivered benchmarks comparing the performance of the open-source Radeon driver against the new closed-source fglrx driver from AMD. These benchmarks had just looked at the AIGLX performance when using Compiz on an Ubuntu 7.10 desktop. In all of the benchmarks except one, the fglrx driver had carried a staggering lead over the open-source competition. In addition to these Compiz benchmarks, on the same system we had also ran some additional benchmarks to see for gaming and 2D rendering how the two ATI Linux drivers compare.

The system once again was running Ubuntu 7.10 "Gutsy Gibbon" with the Linux 2.6.22 kernel and X server 1.3, but with these benchmarks, the Compiz effects were disabled during testing. The hardware included a PCI Express ATI Radeon X800XL 256MB graphics card, Intel Pentium D 820 (2.80GHz dual-core), 2GB of DDR3-1333 memory, and an ASUS P5E3 Deluxe (Intel X38) motherboard. We had used Enemy Territory and GtkPerf as our vehicle for benchmarking the two drivers, since both benchmarks are compatible with the current Radeon driver. The ATI driver used was fglrx 8.42.3.

The last time we had compared these two drivers was back in February with X.Org 7.2: ATI Open v. Closed Drivers. During that examination, Fedora 7 Test 1 was used with the fglrx 8.34 driver, and of course, that was running off AMD's old driver code-base. Mesa and the Radeon driver have also seen a few improvements since that point. Most notably, Mesa 7.0 does contain a number of improvements. In those earlier benchmarks, the Radeon X800XL with the open-source driver was over twice as slow as the X800XL with the fglrx 8.34 driver. However, in these benchmarks we had not looked at the 2D GTK+ performance.

For our Enemy Territory benchmarks, we had completed the timed-demo tests with a resolution of 800 x 600 and 1280 x 1024. For the GtkPerf tests, which as the name implies tests the GTK+ performance, we had reported the results for GtkComboBox, GtkCheckButton, GtkTextView - Add Text, GtkDrawingArea - Text, and the total time needed to run all GtkPerf tests. Each GtkPerf test was run 1,000 times.

<< Previous Page
1
Latest Linux Hardware Reviews
  1. Btrfs On 4 x Intel SSDs In RAID 0/1/5/6/10
  2. AMD Radeon R9 290 On Ubuntu 14.10: RadeonSI Gallium3D vs. Catalyst
  3. MSI X99S SLI PLUS On Linux
  4. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 Offers Great Linux Performance
Latest Linux Articles
  1. Windows 8.1 vs. Ubuntu 14.10 With Intel HD Graphics
  2. 6-Way Ubuntu 14.10 Radeon Gallium3D vs. Catalyst Driver Comparison
  3. NVIDIA vs. Nouveau Drivers On Ubuntu 14.10
  4. Ubuntu 14.10 Offers AMD Radeon Driver Performance Improvements
Latest Linux News
  1. SIMD For JavaScript Continues Coming Along
  2. GNOME 3.15.1 Released
  3. Red Hat Software Collections 1.2 Adds GCC 4.9, Nginx 1.6
  4. GLAMOR Acceleration Continues To Be Cleaned Up
  5. Russia's Yandex Web Browser Finally Released For Linux
  6. Linux Kernel Finally Being Optimized For SSHDs
  7. GPU Profiling Support Lands In Mozilla Firefox
  8. Kubuntu 15.04 Will Use KDE's Plasma 5 By Default
  9. KDBUS Submitted For Review To The Mainline Linux Kernel
  10. An Intel-Based Ubuntu Touch Tablet Is Planning To Launch Soon
Latest Forum Discussions
  1. Is foolish currently develop in machine code, hexadecimal and assembly?
  2. How to get rid of Linux
  3. Reducing The CPU Usage In Mesa To Improve Performance
  4. Help diagnosing problems with a Readon HD 4670 on Mesa 10.3.2-1
  5. Advertisements On Phoronix
  6. nv and xorg.conf under Debian PPC
  7. Looking for a Open-Source AMD experienced Linux mentor
  8. Bad perfomance in gaming