Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Intel Graphics Performance: Clear Linux vs. Xubuntu 16.04 LTS vs. Fedora 23 Xfce

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Intel Graphics Performance: Clear Linux vs. Xubuntu 16.04 LTS vs. Fedora 23 Xfce

    Phoronix: Intel Graphics Performance: Clear Linux vs. Xubuntu 16.04 LTS vs. Fedora 23 Xfce

    With recent benchmarks showing Intel's Clear Linux distribution even being faster for Intel HD Graphics performance compared to other more common distributions like Ubuntu 16.04, I decided to run some more tests and also test Fedora 23 Xfce into the mix.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=23117

  • #2
    Someone's going to call you out for testing all these "bloated" distros, but not Debian :d

    Comment


    • #3
      So it seems like most of these incredible Clear Linux advantages are just down to using DRI3 for Intel? I guess I should finally get around to ripping out xf86-video-intel on my Arch machine and switching to modesetting/glamor like all of the cool kids are doing, though I wish there were an easier way...

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by bug77 View Post
        Someone's going to call you out for testing all these "bloated" distros, but not Debian :d
        I don't know what you're talking about, there aren't any Debian + xfce fanatics in the Phoronix forums . . . . oh wait a second

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by axfelix View Post
          So it seems like most of these incredible Clear Linux advantages are just down to using DRI3 for Intel? I guess I should finally get around to ripping out xf86-video-intel on my Arch machine and switching to modesetting/glamor like all of the cool kids are doing, though I wish there were an easier way...
          You don't need to do that. The intel xorg driver can handle DRI3, it just doesn't use it by default.

          In your X.Org settings (e.g. /etc/X11/xorg.conf.d/20-intel.conf), try something like the following:

          Code:
          Section "Device"
             Identifier  "Intel Graphics"
             Driver      "intel"
             Option      "DRI"    "3"
             #Option      "AccelMethod" "glamor"
             Option      "AccelMethod" "sna"
             Option      "TearFree" "true"
          EndSection
          I've been running DRI3 on my haswell notebook for a while now (since I decided to try out the vulkan driver before it was merged) and its been stable and has performed well enough for my work machine (which admittedly just needs the tear-free option and not the performance).

          Comment


          • #6
            The Arch version is apparently compiled without it -- I already tried that. But I appreciate the tip

            Comment


            • #7
              Hmm... I'm on Arch too and using the r600 driver. I have DRI3 "enabled" in Xorg.conf for sometime. I'm trying to figure out if it's acutally enabled or if it's really DRI2. It seems like both are enabled? I guess I'll need to ask and find out.

              I think you can use the Mesa-git repo on Arch for guaranteed support for DRI3 but I rather use Mesa stable ATM.

              [[email protected] ~]$ cat /var/log/Xorg.0.log | grep DRI
              [ 27.608] (**) RADEON(0): Option "DRI3" "1"
              [ 27.832] (II) RADEON(0): [DRI2] Setup complete
              [ 27.832] (II) RADEON(0): [DRI2] DRI driver: r600
              [ 27.832] (II) RADEON(0): [DRI2] VDPAU driver: r600
              [ 27.837] (**) RADEON(0): DRI3 enabled
              [ 29.282] (II) GLX: Initialized DRI2 GL provider for screen 0

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Xaero_Vincent View Post
                Hmm... I'm on Arch too and using the r600 driver. I have DRI3 "enabled" in Xorg.conf for sometime. I'm trying to figure out if it's acutally enabled or if it's really DRI2. It seems like both are enabled? I guess I'll need to ask and find out.
                Yes both are enabled. Some clients (like VDPAU) only support DRI2 at the moment.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by debianxfce View Post

                  Most of the phoronix readers already know that Debian testing is the best.
                  http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...way-2016&num=2
                  No need to test anymore.
                  Probably worth testing Rawhide-nodebug as well.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by axfelix View Post
                    So it seems like most of these incredible Clear Linux advantages are just down to using DRI3 for Intel? I guess I should finally get around to ripping out xf86-video-intel on my Arch machine and switching to modesetting/glamor like all of the cool kids are doing, though I wish there were an easier way...
                    What version of xf86-video-intel do you have? DRI3 is working in Gentoo with version 2.99.917_p20160423.

                    /var/log/Xorg.0.log for xf86-video-intel-2.99.917_p20160423 is saying the following:

                    Code:
                    ...
                    [     7.585] (II) Module intel: vendor="X.Org Foundation"
                    [     7.585]    compiled for 1.18.3, module version = 2.99.917         (Note: the patch number is missing)
                    ...
                    [     7.596] (II) intel(0): Using Kernel Mode Setting driver: i915, version 1.6.0 20151010
                    ...
                    [     7.617] (II) intel(0): [DRI2] Setup complete
                    [     7.617] (II) intel(0): [DRI2]   DRI driver: i965
                    [     7.617] (II) intel(0): [DRI2]   VDPAU driver: va_gl
                    [     7.617] (II) intel(0): direct rendering: DRI2 DRI3 enabled
                    What is your Xorg.0.log saying?

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X