Does A Greedy Intel Driver Improve Performance?

Written by Michael Larabel in Display Drivers on 15 April 2009 at 03:27 PM EDT. Page 6 of 8. 20 Comments.

In this test, the Intel Linux driver seems to have regressed a fair amount between the 2.4.1 and 2.6.3 releases. Using UXA had led to a performance slowdown.

Using UXA was slow, again, but the greedy migration heuristics led to a performance boost with EXA. The xf86-video-intel 2.6 driver though was still much slower than the older 2.4 release from Q4'2008.

A greedy Intel driver led to the best performance with the 128x128px mixed composition. The UMA acceleration architecture was also faster than the EXA default, but still comparing EXA to EXA between the 2.4 and 2.6 releases, there is a clear regression.

At simple blitting, the default EXA was the fastest and there was a nice speed-up compared to the 2.4 driver.


Related Articles
AMD Quietly Funded A Drop-In CUDA Implementation Built On ROCm: It's Now Open-Source
Trying Out & Benchmarking The New Experimental Intel Xe Linux Graphics Driver
Intel's Open-Source Compute Runtime Performing Increasingly Well Against NVIDIA's Proprietary Linux Driver
Intel Arc Graphics See Faster Performance On Ubuntu 23.10
Raspberry Pi 5 Graphics Continue With Open-Source Driver & Crazy Fast Compared To RPi 4
Initial Benchmarks Of The "NVK" Open-Source NVIDIA Vulkan Driver