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. Acer B286HK: A 28-inch UHD LED 4K Monitor For As Low As $350
  2. Intel Xeon E5-1680 v3 & E5-2687W v3 Compared To The Core i7 5960X On Linux
  3. Intel 120GB 530 Series SSD Linux Performance
  4. Btrfs/EXT4/XFS/F2FS RAID 0/1/5/6/10 Linux Benchmarks On Four SSDs
Latest Linux Articles
  1. Mesa Git Yields Performance Improvements For Newer AMD GPUs
  2. Apple OS X 10.10 vs. Ubuntu 14.10 Performance
  3. Mesa 10.5-devel Brings Some Intel Haswell HD Graphics Changes Over Mesa 10.3
  4. NVIDIA vs. Nouveau Drivers With Linux 3.18 + Mesa 10.4-devel
Latest Linux News
  1. NVIDIA Posts Tegra Gallium3D Patch For K1+ Support
  2. Ubuntu 14.10 MacBook Air Tests With Linux 3.18, Mesa 10.5
  3. AMD Richland APU Support Added To Coreboot
  4. 2014 Holiday Shopping Reminder, Happy Thanksgiving
  5. Python 3 Support Added To The GNOME Shell
  6. ReactOS Lands Its New Explorer Shell
  7. Weston's IVI Shell Sees New Version
  8. IMP Launches As Another Open-Source Computer Attempt
  9. Git 2.2.0 Released With 550+ Changes
  10. GNOME 3.15.2 Released
Latest Forum Discussions
  1. Updated and Optimized Ubuntu Free Graphics Drivers
  2. Hurrican SDL Port
  3. Roadmap to Catalyst 14.10 ?
  4. how to configure module phoromatic ?
  5. PulseAudio 6.0 Is Coming & Other Linux Audio Plans For The Future
  6. Debian Developer Resigns From The Systemd Maintainership Team
  7. Cant get working Kaveri APU - A10-7850k
  8. Script for Fan Speed Control