Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 24 of 24

Thread: Fedora 12 vs. Ubuntu 9.10 Benchmarks

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Oct 2007


    Quote Originally Posted by ldesnogu View Post
    The question here was not to measure exactly the impact of compositing by using glxgears, but to see there is an impact.

    All we need to know is whether Michael left compiz on when running the gaming benchmarks.
    Still glxgears is the wrong way to do this, because just running a DRI2 driver has an negative impact on glxgears, while real apps tend to be faster/not impacted.

    glxgears just renders a very simply frame as often as possible so _any_ additional work could have a great impact on it.

    So if you want to test the impact just use any real app.
    It would be close to zero if measurable at all.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Oct 2008


    OK, you know better than I do about this

    So would you have any guess about why Michael's results were so bad?

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Under the bridge


    Quote Originally Posted by natewiebe13 View Post
    Hmm.. That's strange, but my guess is because it has to do with Wine. I just ran the standard (glxgears -fullscreen) on an old computer of mine. I'm running Ubuntu Karmic with an nVidia 7600GS and the nVidia 185 Drivers from the repositories. With effects set to standard (Compiz), I average at around 68 FPS, if I turn off Comiz by setting effects to none, I average 228 FPS. So there is definitely a chance that the reason Fedora benched higher was because Comiz was still enabled.
    I have a gut feeling that Karmic disables the "unredirect fullscreen windows" option by default. I'm saying that because popup notifications no longer cause my fullscreen applications to flicker and flash like crazy, like they used in Jaunty.

    While such a change would make for a better desktop experience, it would impact fullscreen 3d performance quite a bit, especially on lower-end / bandwidth-limited hardware (redirected windows cannot page-flip, so they have to copy memory from back- to front-buffers every frame - which translates into a few hundred MB/sec of "lost" texture bandwidth).

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Apr 2007


    It's not compiz.

    It would make sense for Fedora to backport the fixes in 2.6.32 of CFS due to the performance regressions exposed during benchmarks against BFS. They tend to grab a lot of new features and mix stable with new when there's no obvious stability penalty.

Posting Permissions

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