Comments on: 2D benchmarks on Linux Nvidia, Intel, ATI: xrender

By: admin

admin — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 20:46:16 +0000

To unknow, the units doesn’t really matters, as we only compare cards to cards .. but anyway if you wonder, the unit is “second”… just check out the xrender output to convince yourself.

By: unknow

unknow — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 00:55:30 +0000

Fucking shitty graphs. Include some fucking units.

By: admin

admin — Sat, 02 Aug 2008 13:19:13 +0000

Hi Michael

If you have a “old” geforce look closely at the nv driver. From what i know right now, the 6XXX (and before) has a special 2D drivers in. So the nv driver should work quite fine.

About the ATI, I read a couple of people saying they will flip to ATI. Fine, but read carefully the begin of this post. I switched from ATI to NVidia cause the ATI doesn’t support vblank sync, and believe me this is really a ditch if you want to watch movies on this card.

By: michael

michael — Sat, 02 Aug 2008 07:58:53 +0000

from my experience i’d say the problem does not only affect geforce 8xxx/9xxx cards. i’d love to make some benchmarks comparable to yours with my geforce 6200 as i’ve got exactly the same render performance problem with firefox 3.

unfortunately, i upgraded to suse 11.0 a few weeks ago (hoping an upgrade to the most recent system + drivers would fix it… should have known better — never install a “.0″…), with one side effect being none of the available nvidia binary drivers working any longer with my card.

but the firefox 3 rendering already was there with my old configuration (nvidia driver). after the failed sw upgrade i was hoping an upgrade to some gf 8x/9x card could help, but now i’m more about xgrading to ATI. i don’t need compiz, just a decent 2d performance and dual screen support.

By: Dimitris

Dimitris — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 13:52:24 +0000

Here are my results from xrenderbenchmark. I created identical graphs so the comparison is easy. The behaviour of the graphics card is similar. In the first graph nvidia is always faster than nv, but in the second graph nvidia is a bit slower than nvidia. The numbers shows that my system (although slower Ahtlon Xp 1800+ and Geforce 4 Ti4600) is faster than that of the benchmark of this blog post. So the problem is more intense in the latest cards, but id DOES exist in legacy drivers as well.

http://img176.imageshack.us/my.php?image=graph1vv2.jpg
http://img169.imageshack.us/my.php?image=graph2sk9.jpg

Do you agree?

By: admin

admin — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 00:03:29 +0000

default:

Really ? I’m missing something. The nv forum say this was a bug, and should be fixed in the next release. (I’m currently using the bleeding edge beta – 177 -) and the bug is still in there. I’ve never heard, the 2D engine is missing …

By: default

default — Mon, 28 Jul 2008 23:55:41 +0000

This problem doesn’t exist with pre-G80 (7xxx and lower) NVidia parts. The 8xxx+ cards lack the traditional 2D engine, so you HAVE to use the 3D engine for 2D acceleration with these newer cards. Looks like NVidia doesn’t have such a driver ready — AFAIK the drivers at the moment use software rendering for 2D stuff in this case.

By: Dimitris

Dimitris — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 07:49:36 +0000

The next nvidia release. Yes, but for who? Do legacy drivers get to be fixed as well? I’m afraid not!! And i don’t think that so called “legacy” nvidia cards, lack the capabilities of giving a decent 2D working environment

By: Evincar

Evincar — Sat, 28 Jun 2008 17:35:55 +0000

Nvidia is fixing that, or so I hear, don’t give up hope!. With regards to ATI, they are also making awesome progress in fglrx, it is enormously better than just 6 months ago…XVideo, S3 sleep, and Compiz all work pretty well now on my laptop with X1400.

By: solarwind

solarwind — Sat, 28 Jun 2008 15:53:59 +0000

http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=1696850&postcount=45

I asked them when the fix will be out…