Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 47

Thread: radeonhd r6xx-7xx EXA performance patch

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    3,763

    Default

    How's that possible?

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    980

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Obscene_CNN View Post
    try changing the number of test rounds gtkperf does from 100 to 1000. Your CPU is quite a bit faster than mine so I would expect less of an improvement. (I have only a 2GHz laptop with a radeonhd 3100)
    Code:
    Test rounds: 1000  Test All
    
    Driver:                           Total time:
    --------------------------------------------------------
    radeon   (latest git)             108.77
    radeonhd (latest git + patch)     109.14
    Most of the time however is spend in GtkTextView - Add text (54 seconds) and the more test rounds the slower the widget becomes.

    x11perf probably is a better way to benchmark graphics performance, but I don't have several hours to spare

  3. #13
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Richland, WA
    Posts
    132

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RealNC View Post
    How's that possible?
    x11perf runs a benchmark for a set period of time and counts the number of times an operation is performed.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Richland, WA
    Posts
    132

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by monraaf View Post
    Code:
    Test rounds: 1000  Test All
    
    Driver:                           Total time:
    --------------------------------------------------------
    radeon   (latest git)             108.77
    radeonhd (latest git + patch)     109.14
    Most of the time however is spend in GtkTextView - Add text (54 seconds) and the more test rounds the slower the widget becomes.

    x11perf probably is a better way to benchmark graphics performance, but I don't have several hours to spare
    I don't particularly like gtkperf. I can underclock my 2GHz CPU to 500MHz and get 20% better scrolling times in it.

    Strange... thanks for testing my patch and sharing the results though.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    83

    Default

    radeonhd+patch 100x gtkperf 6.47
    radeonhd+patch 1000x gtkperf 102.10

    tormods latest git radeonhd 100x gtkperf 7.04
    tormods latest git radeonhd 1000x gtkperf 111.something

    I was a little excited and forgot to save the results before installing and resstarting X

    I can re-run with tormods during the weekend.

    Kubuntu 9.04, kernel 2.6.30rc6 x86_64, amd athlon x2 5600+ 2.8GHz, radeon hd3850

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,284

    Default

    There was a bit of discussion about performance results on IRC a little while ago; one thing to remember is that the patch only affects performance if the proper drm is installed and if EXA hardware acceleration is being used. If the driver is running with shadowfb acceleration then the patch won't make any difference...

  7. #17
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Richland, WA
    Posts
    132

    Default

    conholster,

    Thanks for trying my patch out and sharing your results. That is a lot more like I expected. Almost a 10% increase

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    980

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bridgman View Post
    If the driver is running with shadowfb acceleration then the patch won't make any difference...
    Well, I'm sorry that my test results aren't what one would like them to be but if I was running with shadowfb acceleration I wouldn't get an Xv adapter, now would I?

    Code:
    $ xvinfo
    X-Video Extension version 2.2
    screen #0
      Adaptor #0: "RadeonHD Textured Video"

  9. #19
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Richland, WA
    Posts
    132

    Default

    No offense monraaf,

    We didn't mean to offend you with our speculation on the IRC and I didn't think it would end up here. Sorry. It just seemed strange that your results for 1000 test rounds were so close. Another factor behind the IRC speculation was the fact I got better times on my slower laptop (91 seconds without the patch vs 85 seconds with it). I have done extensive and careful benchmarking on this patch and it just seems strange. Possible error on your part of doing the test was one thing that had to be taken into consideration however.

    Seeing that someone got numbers close to what you had initially with the same speed processor albeit with a different card adds credibility to your results. With so few results to go off of your results are as valid as anybody's.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,284

    Default

    Yeah, definitely no offence intended and the apology should be mine if that came off the wrong way. Just thought it was better if we talked straight rather than being sneaky and asking for a log

    I think we were all expecting a bit more difference -- the ratio between CPU and GPU performance should definitely affect results (ie with a 3200 GPU you would see less speedup than with a 3850, since the 3200 is more likely to be GPU limited) but I didn't think there was enough parallelism in the current driver code to totally eliminate the effect of the patch.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •