Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 22

Thread: 2D performance on 'radeon' vs 'radeonhd'

  1. #11

    Default

    This is the performance I am getting with my MacBookPro 2.17 GHz, Ubuntu 8.04 and drivers from https://launchpad.net/~tormodvolden/+archive

    ati driver git 20080510 with XAA
    Code:
    GtkEntry - time:  0,09
    GtkComboBox - time:  6,56
    GtkComboBoxEntry - time:  5,45
    GtkSpinButton - time:  0,85
    GtkProgressBar - time:  0,49
    GtkToggleButton - time:  2,63
    GtkCheckButton - time:  2,62
    GtkRadioButton - time:  3,15
    GtkTextView - Add text - time: 12,25
    GtkTextView - Scroll - time:  7,87
    GtkDrawingArea - Lines - time:  1,15
    GtkDrawingArea - Circles - time:  5,35
    GtkDrawingArea - Text - time: 28,90
    GtkDrawingArea - Pixbufs - time:  3,52
     --- 
    Total time: 80,85
    ati driver git 20080510 with NoAccel
    Code:
    GtkEntry - time:  0,09
    GtkComboBox - time:  6,43
    GtkComboBoxEntry - time:  5,22
    GtkSpinButton - time:  0,82
    GtkProgressBar - time:  0,48
    GtkToggleButton - time:  2,57
    GtkCheckButton - time:  2,57
    GtkRadioButton - time:  3,05
    GtkTextView - Add text - time: 12,76
    GtkTextView - Scroll - time: 51,05
    GtkDrawingArea - Lines - time:  2,05
    GtkDrawingArea - Circles - time:  7,77
    GtkDrawingArea - Text - time: 28,43
    GtkDrawingArea - Pixbufs - time:  3,51
     --- 
    Total time: 126,79
    radeonhd 1.2.1 driver with XAA
    Code:
    GtkEntry - time:  0,09
    GtkComboBox - time: 25,78
    GtkComboBoxEntry - time: 15,74
    GtkSpinButton - time:  0,93
    GtkProgressBar - time:  0,54
    GtkToggleButton - time:  2,82
    GtkCheckButton - time: 11,97
    GtkRadioButton - time: 12,83
    GtkTextView - Add text - time: 16,61
    GtkTextView - Scroll - time:  7,70
    GtkDrawingArea - Lines - time:  2,40
    GtkDrawingArea - Circles - time: 25,24
    GtkDrawingArea - Text - time: 28,60
    GtkDrawingArea - Pixbufs - time:  3,54
     --- 
    Total time: 154,79
    radeonhd 1.2.1 driver with ShadowFB
    Code:
    GtkEntry - time:  0,09
    GtkComboBox - time:  7,16
    GtkComboBoxEntry - time:  5,90
    GtkSpinButton - time:  0,83
    GtkProgressBar - time:  0,48
    GtkToggleButton - time:  2,66
    GtkCheckButton - time:  2,84
    GtkRadioButton - time:  3,55
    GtkTextView - Add text - time: 12,34
    GtkTextView - Scroll - time:  7,18
    GtkDrawingArea - Lines - time:  1,35
    GtkDrawingArea - Circles - time:  3,90
    GtkDrawingArea - Text - time:  3,90
    GtkDrawingArea - Pixbufs - time:  0,25
     --- 
    Total time: 52,43
    The best choice is radeonhd with ShadowFB.

    A question: why not making ShadowFB the default on radeonhd?

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,544

    Default

    We either need to make the acceleration go faster or make shadowfb the default. The plan is to make acceleration go faster

    That said, shadowfb does run pretty fast and is nice and simple. There are issues having it coexist with 3D though...

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    33

    Default

    I noticed you haven't tried 'EXA' acceleration. It will blow your other test results out of the water.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,544

    Default

    Yep. Radeonhd doesn't have the latest EXA code yet, but it will soon. Our testing has shown that you also need a very recent X server (to pick up some glyph cacheing improvements) in order to get the really good performance -- does that match what you are seeing ?

  5. #15

    Default

    I forgot to say I had also tried EXA acceleration (either with radeon and radeonhd) and it's really slow (I interrupted the test because it was too slow). Note that I only upgraded the display drivers; xserver, mesa, drm are all the defaults found in Ubuntu 8.04.

    Also note I performed the tests with:
    Code:
    gtkperf -c 500 -a

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Bulgaria
    Posts
    269

    Default

    radeonhd runs glxgears faster than radeon here. 800+ vs 300+ FPS. Of course DRI is not loaded when under radeon, not that it can detect my R500, actually.

    I run a simple xorg.conf on radeonhd with only XAA turned on. When I replace "radeonhd" with "ati" and that's the result I get.

    How about that for a comparison?
    Or is it because it can't detect my chip?
    Last edited by sundown; 05-16-2008 at 01:22 PM.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    405

    Default

    Are you sure DRI isn't loaded for radeon? It ususally loads to support texturedvideo with CP. The DRI stuff may be the reason for the slowdown though, because it's there, but there's no acceleration.

  8. #18

    Default Update

    I updated drm modules, libdrm, mesa to latest git and tried ati driver with EXA.

    ati driver git 20080515 with EXA
    Code:
    $ gtkperf -a -c 500
    GtkPerf 0.40 - Starting testing: Tue May 20 15:50:08 2008
    
    GtkEntry - time:  0,09
    GtkComboBox - time:  7,84
    GtkComboBoxEntry - time:  5,97
    GtkSpinButton - time:  1,06
    GtkProgressBar - time:  0,60
    GtkToggleButton - time:  3,30
    GtkCheckButton - time:  3,25
    GtkRadioButton - time:  3,42
    GtkTextView - Add text - time: 12,55
    GtkTextView - Scroll - time:  2,58
    GtkDrawingArea - Lines - time:  2,48
    GtkDrawingArea - Circles - time:  1,83
    GtkDrawingArea - Text - time:  3,00
    GtkDrawingArea - Pixbufs - time:  0,27
     --- 
    Total time: 48,24
    It's a lot faster now, comparable to radeonhd with ShadowFB. "GtkTextView - Scroll" is about 3x faster than radeonhd.

    With glxgears I get this:
    Code:
    $ glxgears 
    Warning, RV530 detected, 3D HAHAHAHAHA!!.
    Mesa program:
    -------------
    # Fragment Program/Shader
      0: MOV OUTPUT[0], INPUT[1];
      1: END
    9787 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1957.329 FPS
    9890 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1977.899 FPS

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,544

    Default

    Ahh, now that's more like it

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    46

    Default

    Now if only someone would create bleeding-edge git .deb files for those packages...

    (hopeful)

Posting Permissions

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