John Lightsey schrieb:
I gave up on specviewperf after waiting over half an hour for the Voodoo 5 to
run it. It's just too time consuming. Are there one or two tests that stand
out in particular?
I'd propose 3dsmax-02, ugs-03 and proe-02 since in the Radeon driver
comparison done by Ronald Sc
On Monday 23 August 2004 12:36, Ian Romanick wrote:
> John Lightsey wrote:
> > Once I have all the benchmarks together I'll make some pretty little
> > graphs.
> >
> > Soany suggestions, comments, feedback?
>
> First off, great work! Hopefully you'll be willing to re-run those
> tests to look
John Lightsey wrote:
Once I have all the benchmarks together I'll make some pretty little graphs.
Soany suggestions, comments, feedback?
First off, great work! Hopefully you'll be willing to re-run those
tests to look for regressions in future releases. ;)
I have only two criticisms. First,
On Sunday 22 August 2004 18:37, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 22, 2004 at 01:16:18AM -0500, John Lightsey wrote:
> > Matrox G400 32MB (mga)
...
> I'm aware of two perfomance bottlenecks in the driver.
>
> Number one is that it always uses synchronous DMA. I have asynchronous
> DMA working just
On Sun, Aug 22, 2004 at 01:16:18AM -0500, John Lightsey wrote:
>
> Matrox G400 32MB (mga)
> glxgears - 1000.2
> q2 640x480 - 62.9
> q2 800x600 - 52.3
> q2 1024x768 - 40.2
> q3 640x480 - 65.9
> q3 800x600 - 51.4
> q3 1024x768 - 36.4
> rtcw 640x480 - 42.3
> rtcw 800x600 - 33.5
> rtcw 1024x768 - 24.7
>
> At least on the fedora-test list the new Xorg CVS seems to be showing up
> some i815/830 "works with 2.6.8.1 but not 2.6.old" kernels.
hmm interesting.. I'll try and get Xorg on one of my i810 systems in the
next day or two...
Dave.
>
--
David Airlie, Software Engineer
http://www.skynet.ie
On Sul, 2004-08-22 at 21:51, John Lightsey wrote:
> So... A Radeon DDR 32MB running DRI seems to be faster than a TNT2 32MB.
> Matrox G400 seems to be faster on everything other than Unreal Tournament.
>
> I'll send a link to the graphs on Monday.
Maybe I should get the Voodoo2 DRI written. Th
In gmane.comp.video.dri.devel, you wrote:
> I looked around for some free software programs that would calculate an
> average framerate rather than simply showing a FPS counter, but I didn't find
> any. Something based on crystal-space would be particularly nice.
Have a look at the samples prov
Here are the FGLRX and Nvidia scores for comparison...
The Nvidia drivers were built from the packages in Debian non-free (1.0.6111)
and the FGLRX drivers were built from Flavio Stanchina's packages (3.11.1).
BFG FX5200 Ultra 128MB
glxgears - 3934.8
q2 640x480 - 337.1
q2 800x600 - 312.3
q2 1024x
You're right. It's a 8mb mobility M3 in a dell latitude c600.
Sorry, not my notebook ;-)
---
SF.Net email is sponsored by Shop4tech.com-Lowest price on Blank Media
100pk Sonic DVD-R 4x for only $29 -100pk Sonic DVD+R for only $33
Save 50% off R
On Sunday 22 August 2004 05:39, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Sul, 2004-08-22 at 07:16, John Lightsey wrote:
> > I shut off most of the services on the machine. rcconf shows klogd,
> > makedev, and sysklogd as the only services active at boot. The kernel
> > used was 2.6.7-1-k7 from Debian.
>
> Which DRI
On Sun, 2004-08-22 at 01:16 -0500, John Lightsey wrote:
> This is my third attempt sending this email. If sourceforge decides to let
> all three copies through at once, you'll have to forgive me.
It's mostly me administrating the dri-{announce,devel,patches} at the
moment... if anyone (preferabl
On Sun, 2004-08-22 at 11:40 +0200, Steffen Hein wrote:
> On Sunday 22 August 2004 08:16, John Lightsey wrote:
> > Rage 128 Pro (r128) At 640x480 this one seemed semi-reliable. At 1024x768
> > it usually froze. glxgears gave this one 518.6 fps.
>
> I also encountered this instability on a mobil
On Sunday 22 August 2004 01:52, Adam Jackson wrote:
> On Sunday 22 August 2004 02:16, John Lightsey wrote:
> > At any rate, here are the results of the first run. If anyone has
> > suggestions for fixing any of the cards which failed in one way or
> > another, I would really appreciate the feedbac
On Sul, 2004-08-22 at 13:11, Dave Airlie wrote:
> there should be no regression between them, I'd expect the currrnt CVS
> ones might in theory be slower than 2.6.7 but I haven't seen any
> regressions on the radeon modules while I've been doing the function table
> work, 2.6.7 is pretty close to C
>
> Which DRI kernel modules - the CVS tree provided ones or the 2.6.7
> kernel ones ?
there should be no regression between them, I'd expect the currrnt CVS
ones might in theory be slower than 2.6.7 but I haven't seen any
regressions on the radeon modules while I've been doing the function table
On Sul, 2004-08-22 at 07:16, John Lightsey wrote:
> I shut off most of the services on the machine. rcconf shows klogd, makedev,
> and sysklogd as the only services active at boot. The kernel used was
> 2.6.7-1-k7 from Debian.
Which DRI kernel modules - the CVS tree provided ones or the 2.6.7
ke
On Sunday 22 August 2004 04:59, Felix Kühling wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 01:16:18 -0500
>
> John Lightsey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Diamond Speedstar a90 16MB (savage 4 pro+) Lots of lockups. glxgears
> > gave this a disappointing 229 fps.
>
> There are rumors about some Savage4's that loc
On Sunday 22 August 2004 04:57, Simon 'corecode' Schubert wrote:
> On 22.08.2004, at 08:16, John Lightsey wrote:
> > glxgears - let it run for 1 minute then marked down the highest score
>
> how reproducable and meaningful is a highest score? I don't know, but I
> got a feeling that using a mean or
On 22.08.2004, at 08:16, John Lightsey wrote:
glxgears - let it run for 1 minute then marked down the highest score
how reproducable and meaningful is a highest score? I don't know, but I
got a feeling that using a mean or a median might be of better
reproducability and also might better reflect
On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 01:16:18 -0500
John Lightsey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Diamond Speedstar a90 16MB (savage 4 pro+) Lots of lockups. glxgears gave
> this a disappointing 229 fps.
There are rumors about some Savage4's that lock up when reading the
status register. :-/ A workaround would
On Sunday 22 August 2004 08:16, John Lightsey wrote:
> Rage 128 Pro (r128) At 640x480 this one seemed semi-reliable. At 1024x768
> it usually froze. glxgears gave this one 518.6 fps.
I also encountered this instability on a mobility M6 (mobile Rage128)
---
> Diamond Speedstar a90 16MB (savage 4 pro+) Lots of
lockups.
I can confirm that this card locks up very frequently.
One way which I have found to immediately lock it up
is by attempting to use GL_NV_texgen_reflection.
Hope this helps the savage developers.
__
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sunday 22 August 2004 02:16, John Lightsey wrote:
> At any rate, here are the results of the first run. If anyone has
> suggestions for fixing any of the cards which failed in one way or
> another, I would really appreciate the feedback.
Awesome s
24 matches
Mail list logo
