Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13

Thread: Which are the main reasons of the poor performance of open graphics driver?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    87

    Default Which are the main reasons of the poor performance of open graphics driver?

    Is it mainly a matter of too many layer?
    Or algorithms don't sufficiently flexible to be able to use at best the hardware?
    Or both?

    Note:
    I speak for situations when the documentation is present as happen on Intel (at least on most part) and partially on Amd.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    872

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alelinuxbsd View Post
    as happen on Intel
    Intel linux drivers are as fast as windows ones on sandy bridge hardware, sometimes even faster!
    ## VGA ##
    AMD: X1950XTX, HD3870, HD5870
    Intel: GMA45, HD3000 (Core i5 2500K)

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by darkbasic View Post
    Intel linux drivers are as fast as windows ones on sandy bridge hardware, sometimes even faster!
    benchmarked on obsolete software like quake3 LOL...
    all pbuffer based software like quake3 are obsolede!
    FBO+shadermodel 3+VTF are the minimum features for dx9 class hardware benchmarks!
    and FBO+shadermodel3+VTF+HDR are the minimum for dx10 class hardware.
    and FBO+shader4+VTF+HDR+Tesselation are the minimum for dx11 class hardware.
    also all benchmarks with test and benchmark online benchmarks are invalid.
    means all unigine benchmarks are invalid!
    only REAL games and REAL software are valid benchmarks!
    meybe you can benchmark with oilrush but i think phoronix test suide do not have oil rush as a profile.


    show me your benchmarks to prove your words : "Intel linux drivers are as fast as windows ones on sandy bridge hardware, sometimes even faster"

    you will not bring any valid one. (valid=real game and not outdated)

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    87

    Default

    And as i noticed here:
    Could you put more benchmark comparison using open graphics driver?
    despite intel seem (at least based on the only same test between the benchmarks present on both article) even better then amd, remain a very huge difference against proprietary driver.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    601

    Default

    A lack of manpower.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    872

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qaridarium View Post
    benchmarked on obsolete software like quake3 LOL...
    No, benchmarked on shader intensive games like xonotic.
    ## VGA ##
    AMD: X1950XTX, HD3870, HD5870
    Intel: GMA45, HD3000 (Core i5 2500K)

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    143

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marek View Post
    A lack of manpower.
    This. We have easily less than a tenth of the number of developers that work on the proprietary drivers.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    87

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marek View Post
    A lack of manpower.
    How is possible?
    Generally important open project have many collaboration around the world.Even more respect proprietary software.
    Anyway often proprietary driver on linux aren't good (for bugs), only nVidia make a little better, because they have few interest on Linux.
    The group that work on linux driver usually are limited even on proprietary driver.
    Other hypothesis:
    - argument too difficult so is a big limit at partecipation of a certain level?
    - slow decision-making in the direction (feautures, etc) to be taken during developing?
    - development process does not efficiently structured to avoid the task carried out by a developer does not block the work of another if it isn't concluded? (This problem for example happen for Gimp while after the 2.8 release perhaps will be solved).

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    872

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alelinuxbsd View Post
    The group that work on linux driver usually are limited even on proprietary driver.
    Yes, but 90% of the code is shared with the windows driver.
    ## VGA ##
    AMD: X1950XTX, HD3870, HD5870
    Intel: GMA45, HD3000 (Core i5 2500K)

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    87

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by darkbasic View Post
    Yes, but 90% of the code is shared with the windows driver.
    Even on Amd or only on nVidia?
    Given that the main part of the code is shared why amd is always so behind nVidia?

    And about the other hypothesisf the distance on the open source driver?
    Was i right or wrong?

    Generally i think that once is known the main problems is possible move on, so perhaps could be helpful known the reasons behind this huge lack of performance.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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