Originally posted by BlackStar
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
AMD Catalyst vs. X.Org Radeon Driver 2D Performance
Collapse
X
-
-
I *think* Radeon uses EXA by default or, at least, Ubuntu enables EXA without user intervention.
Leave a comment:
-
What? The test was done without EXA for the radeon driver? Is this a joke?
Leave a comment:
-
To reiterate, each driver was left in its stock configuration with no extra xorg.conf options being set or AMDPCSDB options being assigned.Last edited by oibaf; 19 January 2009, 05:36 AM.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by DoDoENT View PostThat's exactly what I wanted to ask. If I use fglrx with compiz it's slow, but without compiz it's quite usable. With radeon driver I got a lot better 2D experience and good multi-monitor support (very useful on laptops), but unfortunately I have to use fglrx because of the PowerPlay and at almost two times more FPS in 3D games (with fglrx scorched3D works perfectly, with radeon it's almost unplayable).
My card is Mobility Radeon X1600 (R500).
As soon as radeon driver gets PowerPlay support and better 3D support, I will rather use radeon driver than fglrx.
I am using powerplay with radeon driver on my mobility x1600 for a few months now and it is working great..you need few patches from this brantch I think
Leave a comment:
-
phoronix-test-suite batch-benchmark gtkperf jxrendermark renderbench
Should cover it when running version 1.6.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by WSmart View PostWhat's the Phoronix Test Suite command? Is there a suite name?
Thanks!
Of course, eventually making a GUI interface and menu icon for the PTS would be really great. Maybe that's coming in version 2?
Leave a comment:
-
...or run the Phoronix Test Suite yourself to see how your system stacks up.
Thanks!
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by MostAwesomeDude View PostCan't say I'm really surprised. On one hand, fglrx has massive amounts of code. There's spots in our EXA where we have just said, "this could be accelerated, but not without a lot of spaghetti." fglrx is spaghetti.
On the other hand, fglrx has some known weaknesses. The pixmap test is the classic example, although there were a few others that pleasantly surprised me. Their handling of things when a compositor is enabled also sucks; I would bet that their test numbers would go down significantly if a compositor were enabled, although it's entirely possible that they've improved their compositing since then.]
under KDE4
wihtout desktop effetct:
GtkPerf 0.40 - Starting testing: Sun Jan 18 21:45:04 2009
GtkDrawingArea - Pixbufs - time: 1,40
---
Total time: 1,41
with desktop effects enabled:
GtkPerf 0.40 - Starting testing: Sun Jan 18 21:45:13 2009
GtkDrawingArea - Pixbufs - time: 0,12
---
Total time: 0,12
Leave a comment:
-
Interesting article, was a good read. Hoping for a sequel with more reallife applications to see how combinations of these aspects perform.
After reading my share of ati related driver development I can't surpress the feeling this test only shows that the prop. driver is aimed toward 3d accelaration to get the 2d acceleration up-and-running. untill then the 2d performance of catalyst is not wat it must be... just a brainfart from my side
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: