On Saturday 20 August 2005 22:25, Roman v. Gemmeren wrote: > Mark Knecht wrote: > > Hi Roman, > > No immediate need. I seem to have solved the problem, at least as a > > starting point. > > > > My bad for not trying the ~x86 version of the nvidia driver. Once > > installed I now get into Gnome, get Direct Rendering and get about > > 1600 FPS out of glxgears so I think things look at least OK. > > > > What is a reasonable glxgears FPS for an AGP 4X GeForce4 card > > running on an Athlon XP 1600+? > > > > Anyway, I seem to be in good shape now. Thanks for writing back. > > Hi, > > i'm glad you solved your problem. I had a Geforce 5200 until i purchased > a ATI Card 3 weeks ago. > glxgears gave me ~1500fps without any special tweaking. (BUT PLS don't > use glxgears for benchmarking stuff, it gives very inconsistent results > i on different systems). It's better to use sth like ut2004-demo. > > PS: My new ATI x800 (i know, little overkill, but after my exams...;)) > gives me also 1600fps in glxgears (there are some very strange problems > with the drivers on amd64).;( > But hey, gaming is, what windows was made for.
glxgears is more or less a cpu bench ;) The fps are much more influenced by the CPU you are using than by the card - except when direct rendering is missing... But there is some little interresting point: with kwin or integrity (qt based) glxgears is always a little bit faster, than with the gtk-wm (metacity, sawfish) I tried.. don't know why. -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
