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

Thread: Intel Ivy Bridge Acceleration Of UXA vs. SNA

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,359

    Default Intel Ivy Bridge Acceleration Of UXA vs. SNA

    Phoronix: Intel Ivy Bridge Acceleration Of UXA vs. SNA

    It's been a few months since last delivering any Intel SNA acceleration architecture benchmarks but with all of the many recent xf86-video-intel 2.20.x driver releases, here's some new benchmarks comparing the UXA and SNA acceleration back-ends for Intel's Ivy Bridge hardware.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=18237

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,582

    Default

    Turning on SNA for any supported Intel HD graphics hardware generation is as easy as setting the "AccelMethod" option within the xorg.conf configuration file to "SNA" as its value.
    Seeing instructions like this just makes me depressed. A person should not have to hand edit files when it comes to graphic options. Even an ncurses config app would be an improvement.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by deanjo View Post
    Seeing instructions like this just makes me depressed. A person should not have to hand edit files when it comes to graphic options. Even an ncurses config app would be an improvement.
    driconf, obviously. Though, I don't know if it was patched to support SNA Accelmethod.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    ฿ 16LDJ6Hrd1oN3nCoFL7BypHSEYL84ca1JR
    Posts
    1,020

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by deanjo View Post
    Seeing instructions like this just makes me depressed. A person should not have to hand edit files when it comes to graphic options.
    It will become the default once it is ready to become the default. Usually there is a reason it is not the default.

    As a normal user you wouldn't change your ddx acceleration anyway, would you?

    The better method by the way is creating a file
    /etc/X11/xorg.conf.d/20-intel.conf
    with
    Code:
    Section "Device"
       Identifier  "Intel Graphics"
       Driver      "intel"
       Option      "AccelMethod"  "sna"
    EndSection
    For some reason this is probably going to interfere with prime.

    You could also compile xf86-video-intel with --with-default-accel=sna so you won't have to do anything.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,582

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisXY View Post
    It will become the default once it is ready to become the default. Usually there is a reason it is not the default.

    As a normal user you wouldn't change your ddx acceleration anyway, would you?

    The better method by the way is creating a file
    /etc/X11/xorg.conf.d/20-intel.conf
    with
    Code:
    Section "Device"
       Identifier  "Intel Graphics"
       Driver      "intel"
       Option      "AccelMethod"  "sna"
    EndSection
    For some reason this is probably going to interfere with prime.

    You could also compile xf86-video-intel with --with-default-accel=sna so you won't have to do anything.
    To change graphics options, a person should not have to fart around with text based entries, period. Old sax2 in suse used to provide a simple manageable gui that would create the entries in xorg.conf, all you had to do is fire up the gui, select the option you wanted and restart x. Bang, done.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,582

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crazycheese View Post
    driconf, obviously. Though, I don't know if it was patched to support SNA Accelmethod.
    A good configuration system should detect the new options and offer the available and applicable Boolean options. SaX2 did this and didn't require patching every time a new option was put into a driver.


    Last edited by deanjo; 12-06-2012 at 07:21 PM.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by deanjo View Post
    A good configuration system should detect the new options and offer the available and applicable Boolean options. SaX2 did this and didn't require patching every time a new option was put into a driver.
    This is an extension, the primary cfg is set in text files with is the right way. "Detect" thing will fail in several cases, although its a good one. It still needs maintenance.
    Everything you wrote is non-exclusively correct, lets find a guy who implements it. :P

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    SuperUserLand
    Posts
    535

    Default

    INTEL MAKE THIS THE DEFAULT



    signed: everyone who uses intel gfx

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,582

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crazycheese View Post
    This is an extension, the primary cfg is set in text files with is the right way. "Detect" thing will fail in several cases, although its a good one. It still needs maintenance.
    Well I've been "maintaining" old SaX2 for my own usage and it still works extremely well for detecting the driver options without having to do anything to the detection code. The point is that in a modern operating system, a person should not have to be forced to hand editing files to enable features on a primary subsystem. I'm not saying to eliminate the option of hand editing but a gui should accommodate enabling of the features in a end user friendly way. It's just minor things like having to hand edit the config files that keep people away from linux.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    4,994

    Default

    For people not using opensuse, what happened to their conf tool? A short history on why this superior tool is no longer maintained would be useful.

Posting Permissions

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