Subject: Re: drm drivers for NetBSD
To: None <M.Drochner@fz-juelich.de>
From: Eric Anholt <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 04/03/2007 14:18:29
On Thu, 2007-03-22 at 20:36 +0100, Matthias Drochner wrote:
> email@example.com said:
> > > The "glxgears" score is actually a bit less than with software
> > > rendering
> > Did you turn off debugging?=20
> The code is compiled in, but the "hw.dri.debug" sysctl flag
> is switched off.
> Checked a bit more throughly and found that software is only faster
> with the (relatively small) default window size of glxgears.
> At full screen size, dri wins: I'm getting 80 fps; about 9%
> of a CPU (of 2 on a dual-core) is used plus ~10% system time.
> Software rendering gives 64 fps and uses 99% of a CPU.
> The worst combination is btw to have dri enabled but AIGLX
> disabled. It uses a different way of software rendering
> appearently which causes flickering output and gives 19fps
> at 99% CPU load. In case it matters, the driver modules are
> from Mesa-6.5.2.
This sort of stuff is one of the reasons that every DRI developer ever
will yell at you and say "glxgears is not a benchmark!" :) It's not a
representative workload of 3d activity that needs hardware acceleration,
and furthermore doesn't use normal techniques that any
performance-sensitive application uses.
Some have actually gone so far as to make glxgears require that you pass
-iacknowledgethatglxgearsisnotabenchmark to get the fps numbers.
Eric Anholt anholt@FreeBSD.org
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (FreeBSD)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----