Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ondemand governor dramatically slows down mesa perfomance

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

  • #21
    Originally posted by sdack View Post

    These two pushed my glxgears from 12k to 18k (GeForce GTX260). I think I can break the 20k when I recomplile X11, Mesa and glxgears with optimized settings. One day I will do exactly that..
    Just make sure you are running benchmarks with actual games; glxgears is not a useful representation of a gaming workload.

    Comment


    • #22
      For what it's worth, I ran glxgears with all three governors on my system and got the lowest score with ondemand at 800fps. With conservative and performance, I got virtually identical numbers in the range of 1200fps... simply incredible. Ondemand seems totally broken.

      Comment


      • #23
        glxgears is not a benchmark. You can run it back to back with no differing changes and get completely different numbers. Just moving the window to a different spot changes the numbers. It can show that direct rendering is working well enough to run glxgears, but it can't represent performance.

        I have a 4200 IGP plugged into my TV and a 6850 plugged into 2 desktop monitors (which btw is impossible with catalyst) running in zaphod mode. The 4200 IGP gets higher numbers than the 6850.
        Last edited by duby229; 05-31-2013, 02:22 PM.

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by duby229 View Post
          glxgears is not a benchmark. You can run it back to back with no differing changes and get completely different numbers. Just moving the window to a different spot changes the numbers. It can show that direct rendering is working well enough to run glxgears, but it can't represent performance.

          I have a 4200 IGP plugged into my TV and a 6850 plugged into 2 desktop monitors (which btw is impossible with catalyst) running in zaphod mode. The 4200 IGP gets higher numbers than the 6850.
          I know it's not a benchmark!!!! And I know you can't compare two different systems by these numbers! And I know that the numbers themselves are not indicative of absolute performance!! I'm just saying that under identical circumstances (same computer, same system load, ie I didn't move the windows around during the sampling) I'm getting better numbers in a RELATIVE manor by changing the governor. I ran the tests multiple times and got the same numbers. That's all I'm saying. And my numbers seem to corroborate the 33-50% increase in performance when switching governor in CPU bound applications. So please don't lecture me on the merits of glxgears.

          Comment


          • #25
            You used glxgears as a benchmark, not me, so don't sass me. Use a valid benchmark. glxgears is not cpu bound, or gpu bound, or memory bound. It really doesnt do much of anything. It -can't- give relative information in same configurations.

            You posted to a forum for a website that specializes in benchmarking software, PTS, which you ignored completely and used glxgears instead......... And then you affirm that you know glxgears isnt a benchmark, after you used it as a benchmark, despite posting to a forum that specializes in benchmark software......
            Last edited by duby229; 05-31-2013, 02:55 PM.

            Comment


            • #26
              Catalyst driver Serious Sam 3

              To solve one the game issues, I had two options.

              Disable cool and quiet in the bios.

              Or install on openSUSE, CFU ( CPU Frequency Utility ) and change the setting from on demand to performance.

              Desktop pc. amd phenom IIX4 HD5750

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by duby229 View Post
                You used glxgears as a benchmark, not me, so don't sass me. Use a valid benchmark. glxgears is not cpu bound, or gpu bound, or memory bound. It really doesnt do much of anything. It -can't- give relative information in same configurations.

                You posted to a forum for a website that specializes in benchmarking software, PTS, which you ignored completely and used glxgears instead......... And then you affirm that you know glxgears isnt a benchmark, after you used it as a benchmark, despite posting to a forum that specializes in benchmark software......
                Look I don't want to start a fight. I just posted the numbers above as information. I ran a PIC code on my machine which cpu and I/O bound. All runs came in around the same numbers. So it appears the under heavy load, they are behaving as expected. But glxgears does tell us that under light load, ondemand is being fishy.

                Comment


                • #28
                  glxgears is awesome

                  glxgears is awesome. It is simple and produces numbers fast. It is so simple that it is probably save to say that any tweak, which makes glxgears run faster, helps most other OpenGL applications, too.

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Originally posted by duby229 View Post
                    I have a 4200 IGP plugged into my TV and a 6850 plugged into 2 desktop monitors (which btw is impossible with catalyst) running in zaphod mode.
                    Does randr provideroffloadsink not work better yet?

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by sdack View Post
                      glxgears is awesome. It is simple and produces numbers fast. It is so simple that it is probably save to say that any tweak, which makes glxgears run faster, helps most other OpenGL applications, too.
                      Glxgears is to see if your OpenGL is working, nothing else! What its developers forgot is to put large "Glxgears is NOT a benchmark" as background...!

                      If you want glxgears that IS benchmark, that would be Jgears.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X