LinuxQuestions.org

LinuxQuestions.org (/questions/)
-   Linux - Hardware (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-hardware-18/)
-   -   Proper GLX Gears Comparision (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-hardware-18/proper-glx-gears-comparision-237486/)

otchie1 10-01-2004 07:40 AM

Proper GLX Gears Comparision
 
I'm just curious to hear what frame rates you are all getting but I need to be sure that we are all testing things the same way. Please quote your fps figure when running IN FULL SCREEN 3 gears, solid, both sliders to max and note your default resolution.

Thx.

Slack 10, Nvidia 6160, MX4000 (128MB), 800x600, 135 - 165 fps

320mb 10-01-2004 06:38 PM

Slack 9.1, Nvidia 4496, Geforce2 GTS (32 meg), 1152x864 159-162 fps


I did extensive testing of nvidia drivers, and made a thread here about it.........for my box and video card, the 4496 driver gave me the best performance........so I will stick with it..........I'll boot into my LFS partiton and see what fps I get there and re-post those results..........

LavaDevil94 10-01-2004 09:13 PM

Gentoo 2004.2, nVidia 6111, GeForce FX 5700 Ultra (128MB), 1600x1200-24-32, 248 FPS.

Note: I had many apps running while making the test.

Franklin 10-01-2004 09:46 PM

Code:

697 frames in 5.0 seconds = 139.400 FPS
698 frames in 5.0 seconds = 139.600 FPS
699 frames in 5.0 seconds = 139.800 FPS
698 frames in 5.0 seconds = 139.600 FPS
698 frames in 5.0 seconds = 139.600 FPS
698 frames in 5.0 seconds = 139.600 FPS
698 frames in 5.0 seconds = 139.600 FPS
699 frames in 5.0 seconds = 139.800 FPS

MX440 64MB, 5336 driver, 1152x864, 24bit, Athlon 1100

Fine for me - don't game in linux.

Steve

By the way, I thought I saw someone post somewhere that the nv driver gives better 2D performance. Has anyone else heard this? I didn't notice a difference personally when I tried - just curious. Maybe I was dreaming. ;)

kak 10-02-2004 12:13 AM

Slack 10.0, nvidia 6111, FX5700U, 1600x1200 24bit, Athlon 2800xp between 540fps & 560fps with XMMS playing and Firefox up

mdg 10-02-2004 12:59 AM

Code:

581 frames in 5.0 seconds = 116.200 FPS
586 frames in 5.0 seconds = 117.200 FPS
583 frames in 5.0 seconds = 116.600 FPS
592 frames in 5.0 seconds = 118.400 FPS
585 frames in 5.0 seconds = 117.000 FPS
586 frames in 5.0 seconds = 117.200 FPS

Slack 10, Athlon XP2600, FX5200 (128MB), 5336 driver, 1024X768 32bit, with some apps open but not active.

Seems really slow compared to everyone else. It doesn't bother me, I don't game, but why walk when you can run? Any ideas why it's so slow?


Code:

]# lsmod | grep -i nvidia
nvidia              2071432  12
nvidia_agp              5788  1
agpgart                28392  2 nvidia_agp


ttottoro 10-02-2004 02:47 PM

try a "cat /proc/driver/nvidia/agp/*" so you can see an eventual problem.

Have you the line 'load glx" in the section module of your X config file?

with the same card and an athlon XP 2400, I reach 600 fps per second (debian sid, driver nvidia 6111, 1280*1024, depth=24)

otchie1 10-02-2004 09:28 PM

My other linux system shows,

FX5600 256M, AMD XP2600XP, Slack 10, Nvidia 6116, 1024x768 giving 625 -670 fps fullscreen.

fr0zen 10-08-2004 04:09 AM

1280x1024/16bpp/75hz
FX5900XT/128M/256bit
athlon 2100+

full screen:

4306 frames in 5.0 seconds = 861.200 FPS
4307 frames in 5.0 seconds = 861.400 FPS
4338 frames in 5.0 seconds = 867.600 FPS
4710 frames in 5.0 seconds = 942.000 FPS
4304 frames in 5.0 seconds = 860.800 FPS

otchie1 10-08-2004 07:46 AM

Thank you everyone.

It seems that MX based stuff should achieve about 150 fps and FX kit at least 500 fps. I guess it's time then to update the MX4000 to a cheap FX series card.

The next time I see someone brag about a gears fps in the thousands, I'll remind them to run it fullscreen :-)


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:30 AM.