Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Intel SNA Ivy Bridge - September 2012

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    13,424

    Default Intel SNA Ivy Bridge - September 2012

    Phoronix: Intel SNA Ivy Bridge - September 2012

    Due to the prolific driver development work being done by Intel's Chris Wilson to advance the SNA 2D acceleration architecture for the xf86-video-intel driver, here's some new benchmarks of "Sandy Bridge New Acceleration" when being run from an HD2500-class Core i5 "Ivy Bridge" processor using the new driver release from Sunday.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=17834

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    492

    Default

    It's all nice and everything, but this driver seems to require a fairly recent kernel, as it's not available for Ubuntu 12.04 or Fedora 16

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3

    Default

    I've not have time to dig deeper so I ask here: can SNA be enabled on Ubuntu 12.04?
    If yes can it be done without a complete xorg.conf and is it stable?

  4. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by abraxxa View Post
    I've not have time to dig deeper so I ask here: can SNA be enabled on Ubuntu 12.04?
    If yes can it be done without a complete xorg.conf and is it stable?
    It requires an updated xf86-video-intel to a 2.20 series driver and an xorg.conf snippet to select SNA:

    Code:
    Section "Device"
      Identifier "intel"
      Driver "intel"
      Option "AccelMethod" "sna"
    EndSection
    It should be stable, but it is as yet unproven, hence why it UXA remains the default for the time being.

    These set of benchmarks still have some bogosity behind them. There should be no difference in the copy throughput since that is GPU bound using identical operations, but most of the rest can be explained with the choice of unity wm and using ubuntu. Comparing results from a mobile GT2 device (a i7-3720qm) with this article a deskop GT1 chipset, http://openbenchmarking.org/result/1...SU-1209034SU66, we get the impression that the system under test underperformed significantly.

  5. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ickle View Post
    These set of benchmarks still have some bogosity behind them. There should be no difference in the copy throughput since that is GPU bound using identical operations, but most of the rest can be explained with the choice of unity wm and using ubuntu. Comparing results from a mobile GT2 device (a i7-3720qm) with this article a deskop GT1 chipset, http://openbenchmarking.org/result/1...SU-1209034SU66, we get the impression that the system under test underperformed significantly.
    I have some more cross-desktop 2D tests coming soon.

  6. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael View Post
    I have some more cross-desktop 2D tests coming soon.
    That will be fantastic. As always the challenge I have is to address why the out-of-the-box experience with Ubuntu or Fedora or Gentoo or Debian or... never quite matches up to my expectations, which is frustrating.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Normandy
    Posts
    26

    Thumbs up

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael View Post
    I have some more cross-desktop 2D tests coming soon.
    +1, this is great a news indeed! looking forward to read these

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael View Post
    I have some more cross-desktop 2D tests coming soon.
    Just an idea for a future pair (series? ;-) of articles: Pick a single benchmark (of reasonably short duration) and ask everybody to run it on their current system and upload to openbenchmarking.org, then have fun trying to make sense of the data.

Posting Permissions

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