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

Thread: Intel Glamor Acceleration Compared To SNA, UXA

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,130

    Default Intel Glamor Acceleration Compared To SNA, UXA

    Phoronix: Intel Glamor Acceleration Compared To SNA, UXA

    Going back to last year there's been the "Glamor Acceleration" project out of Intel to accelerate the 2D operations within X using OpenGL on Mesa. This is similar to the Xorg state tracker approach and while it's not yet enabled by default, Intel OTC developers have been making much progress in recent months. In this article is a look at the recent Glamor update while comparing it to the stock Intel UXA acceleration as well as to the other experimental acceleration option: Intel SNA.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=17358

  2. #2

    Default SNA on GMA

    I would be interested if Intel SNA driver improvements would pay out for a GMA950 or GMA3150 netbook integrated graphics. I mean is there general improvement to intel drivers or only the sna parts.

    Greetings
    Last edited by atcl; 05-17-2012 at 05:59 AM.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    970

    Default

    At least GMA45 gets benefits from sna.
    ## VGA ##
    AMD: X1950XTX, HD3870, HD5870
    Intel: GMA45, HD3000 (Core i5 2500K)

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    473

    Default

    SNA is supported all the way down to Gen2 (i8xx, except 810/815). So I too would be interested in tests on those low-end GPUs, particularly the netbook ones.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    26

    Default

    And now let Intel will add only a good driver management manager, as it is under Windows and you can use their drivers

  6. #6

    Default

    Once again I am confounded by your results, so I ran the benchmarks locally (though it appears that I no longer have glamor on the i5-2520m) to check: http://openbenchmarking.org/result/1...SU-1205175SU41 There are some interesting conclusions one can draw from the relative performance on a desktop chip with HD2000 and a mobile chip with HD3000; where the test is GPU bound the lower power SNB is indeed faster than its desktop brethren, but the higher frequency CPU cores and memory on the desktop is hard to compete with.

  7. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by atcl View Post
    I would be interested if Intel SNA driver improvements would pay out for a GMA950 or GMA3150 netbook integrated graphics. I mean is there general improvement to intel drivers or only the sna parts.

    Greetings
    gtkperf runs in half the time with SNA instead of UXA using a GMA950 here.

  8. #8

    Default Thanks

    Thanks for the info! I downloaded the current tar already. Do I just need to compile it with --enable-sna and everything is fine to use sna? The documentation on options is pretty sparse...

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by atcl View Post
    Thanks for the info! I downloaded the current tar already. Do I just need to compile it with --enable-sna and everything is fine to use sna? The documentation on options is pretty sparse...
    What options were you expecting? Every option is a workaround for a driver bug, it is meant to just work...

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    34

    Default

    I'd love if the SNA work was applicable to the GMA500. I have video acceleration (VA-API) and all that working and it's pretty nice, certain 2D operations are quite a bit slower than it seems like they should be so if SNA has different caching and memory management strategies I expect it could radically affect performance on it too. I don't know where the "binary blob"/"open source" line is on this driver though, if the blob insists on managing memory itself than nothing can be done with it.

Posting Permissions

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