|Site sponsored by IGEL|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[directfb-dev] Re: [PATCH] Preliminary AGPONLY support
On Wed, Dec 11, 2002 at 08:22:46PM +0100, Denis Oliver Kropp wrote: > How fast is your CPU/Memory? 600 MHz Duron / PC133 SDRAM. > > vid-vid > > Blit 3.02 secs ( 308.15 MPixel/sec) > > HW (normal value) > > > sys-vid > > Blit 3.09 secs ( 67.91 MPixel/sec) > > SW (seems too slow, but may be correct for 32bit) I'm testing @ 16bit. > > agp-vid > > Blit 3.01 secs ( 280.50 MPixel/sec) > > HW (seems normal) Yes. Over 4 times sys-vid ;) > > vid-agp > > Blit 3.04 secs ( 131.50 MPixel/sec) > > HW (may be normal, but I'm wondering why it's slower than the previous one) Me too. For some reason the card can't write to AGP very fast. > > sys-agp > > Blit 3.02 secs ( 175.89 MPixel/sec) > > SW (seems normal, but should be as fast as sys-sys) Perhaps the difference is due to write-combining. > > agp-agp > > Blit 3.01 secs ( 91.44 MPixel/sec) > > HW (seems normal) I'm wondering why it's so much slower than vid-agp. > > vid-sys > > Blit 3.04 secs ( 136.04 MPixel/sec) > > SW (way too fast, should be around 10 MPixel) My bad. I was using VIDEOLOW surfaces. I get 5.52 MPixel/sec with VIDEOONLY. > > sys-sys > > Blit 3.02 secs ( 136.94 MPixel/sec) > > SW (seems normal) > > > agp-sys > > Blit 3.65 secs ( 8.98 MPixel/sec) > > SW (way too slow, should be as fast as sys-sys) Well AFAIK the AGP memory is non-cacheable but still. It's not much faster than vid-sys. Not good at all. I'll have to code a small agpgart only test app and see if I can reproduce these results... > > Totally weird stuff. > > Maybe you mixed up agp/vid somewhere in the software locking? I don't see any errors in the code. Perhaps I'm just blind or something. We'll see after I try it with just agpgart. -- Ville Syrjälä firstname.lastname@example.org http://www.sci.fi/~syrjala/ -- Info: To unsubscribe send a mail to email@example.com with "unsubscribe directfb-dev" as subject.